1

In our project , we are using baseline conversion as follows.

ProjName-... (For ex Proj-2.0.1.20)

We use to do update our fileversion number as 2.0.1.20.

After we have created components in Clearcase UCM, often we tend to leave some components as not build. (due to no changes done there)

Though we could apply baseline for all the components we could not update fileversion number when it is not build.

So baseline number and file version number are no more same.

My question is this: Should we follow same version number in fileversion and in baseline, so that traceability would be easier? Is that the standard practice being followed?

Samselvaprabu
  • 16,830
  • 32
  • 144
  • 230

1 Answers1

2

There is no standard when it comes to Baseline naming convention: you can chose any versioning number policy you want.

However, one important "feature" of Baseline is:

a non-modified component is not baselined.

Ie when you are setting a baseline on a Stream, only components with modifications since the last baseline receive a new baselines.
The others (not modified) do not.

One best practice, when you want to "remember" the non-modified component baselines (unchanged) and the newly modified component (with new baselines) is to use a composite baseline.
That link to your previous question "What is composite baseline in UCM and when it will be used?".

Community
  • 1
  • 1
VonC
  • 1,262,500
  • 529
  • 4,410
  • 5,250
  • 2
    To underscore this answer, I work with many ClearCase users who ask me how to compare ClearCase baselines in automatic and dynamic manner (since my company provides such an ClearCase add-on). I tell them that they'd better to decide about a naming convention for baselines (or composite baselines) and then they can compare them easily. Further more, if you use a naming convention, you can later use regular expression to retrieve baselines changes in many creative ways (e.g. retrieve the differences of two latest of Proj-2.0.1.* ) – Tamir Gefen Apr 16 '12 at 10:36