Why DocApps are bad

January 27, 2009 at 5:23 pm | Posted in Continous Integration, Development | 4 Comments
Tags: , ,

A recent comment on one of my posts pointed out that you could script DocApp installs using an unsupported ant task. This is certainly a useful facility however it doesn’t overcome the basic problem with Documentum Application Builder and DocApps – they don’t integrate well with source code control systems that are used to maintain all the other code and artefacts needed to develop a working system.

Think how you probably develop code for your system. You probably store your source code in a repository (Visual SourceSafe, Subversion, CVS, etc.). You probably have integrations in your IDE to allow you to automatically checkout and checkin code. You probably build your code automatically from the source code system. This is is all fairly standard development practice (hopefully!).

If you are a little more advanced then maybe you also package and deploy your application automatically and you store automated tests in your source code control system. The tests would be automatically executed whenever you build and deploy from your souce code control system.

Basically the source code control system is the lynchpin of your whole development effort. Using version control and labelling you can see how different releases have progressed and maybe track where and when bugs were introduced.

DocApps sit completely outside of this setup, you are effectively using a development docbase as an alternative source code control system – without all the benefits of a properly featured SCC! In an ideal world all your Documentum configuration assets would live in the source code control system – that includes things like type definitions. Now all the source artefacts for your development live in one place. Hopefully this is exactly what Composer will allow you to do.

Advertisements

Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.