[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference smurf::buildhelp

Title:USG buildhelp questions/answers
Moderator:SMURF::FILTER
Created:Mon Apr 26 1993
Last Modified:Mon Jan 20 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2763
Total number of notes:5802

120.0. "re: shared sandbox gotcha" by SMURF::FILTER (Automatic Posting Software - mail to flume::puck) Tue Jun 08 1993 14:09

Date Of Receipt: 	 7-JUN-1993 18:07:25.81
From: 	WASTED::jmf "Joshua M. Friedman ULTRIX SDE  07-Jun-1993 1808"
To: 	dlong@wasted:zko.dec
CC: 	sue@wasted:zko.dec, mdf@wasted:zko.dec, metsky@wasted:zko.dec,
	woodburn@wasted:zko.dec, lindner@wasted:zko.dec,
	odehelp@wasted:zko.dec
Subj: 	re: shared sandbox gotcha

Dave et al, just an FYI, even though it doesn't help the situation...

Dave, unfortunately, you got caught in the following.  It turns out that
the documentation is not wrong, strictly speaking.  I was also mislead when
I first looked at it.  

It turns out, in the ODE-II User Guide, this is written for just "end users"
which doesn't include shared sandbox administrators.  This information is
really in the Administrator's Guide, which hasn't been completed yet for
ODE v2.  

In fact, in the advanced topics section of the book you were reading (sect. 8)
right after "8.4 Shared Sandboxes", is "8.5 Submitting to More than One Submit"
Tree  (which is an unrelated topic).  The instructions you in fact followed,
were "8.5.3 Submitting to Both a Secondary and a Standard Submit Tree".  
Since this uses a new term (secondary submit tree) which isn't familiar,
you (and I) thought this was referring to the shared sandbox submit tree.
In fact it was not.

This book therefore doesn't have info on how to submit from the shared sb,
but you took instructions from the next section which related to submitting,
and looked reasonably close to what one would expect for the shared sb case,
and applied that.

In the absense of any other information in the user guide, the Ode v2 release
notes say (release notes section 1.2.3 Shared Sandbox administration simplified)
that information on submitting from the shared sandbox (actually it says 'to',
a bug I think) is in the man page for mksharedsb (where in fact you said you
had looked).

Kim Peterson agreed with me that the section 8.5 right after 8.4 can mislead
someone into thinking these are shared sandbox related instructions, and
suggested I gen-ptt report the problem, though it's really being addressed
by a new Admin guide due to be out for first review draft soon.

-josh


------- Forwarded Message

Return-Path: dlong
Received: by quarry.zk3.dec.com; id AA29838; Mon, 7 Jun 1993 16:33:34 -0400
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1993 16:33:34 -0400
From: David Long UEG <dlong>
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
To: sue
Subject: shared sandbox gotcha
Cc: dlong jmf mdf metsky woodburn

Sue,

I submitted 243 files incorrectly last night.  The ODE documentation lead me to
believe the correct thing to do was to use the command:

	bmerge 
-r'LIBCPROG;AGOSMINOR;AGOSMAINT_BL4;alpha_bl012;<93/01/24,16:21:32'

Unfortunately the documentation does not really indicate that you
need to resb first.  The result is a properly merged file, but when
you bsubmit it everything but the revision history is replaced
with the file already in the submit pool.  If you only look at the
revision history of the result in the submit pool everything looks
fine.  Josh tells me he's had lots of similar but non-specific
complaints.  Mike Fairbrother tells me that he has personally had
the same thing happen to files he has submitted.  We are now using
only Mikes recommended way of doing the submit, which avoids bmerge
whenever possible.

- -dl

------- End of Forwarded Message
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name		DateLines
120.1Re: shared sandbox gotchaSMURF::FILTERAutomatic Posting Software - mail to flume::puckTue Jun 08 1993 14:1722
Date Of Receipt: 	 8-JUN-1993 10:07:16.50
From: 	QUARRY::sue "Suzanne L. Yeghiayan  08-Jun-1993 1008"
To: 	"Joshua M. Friedman, OSF/UNIX SDE 381-1548" <jmf@DEC:.zko.quarry>
CC: 	dlong@DEC:.zko.quarry, mdf@DEC:.zko.quarry, metsky@DEC:.zko.quarry,
	woodburn@DEC:.zko.quarry, lindner@DEC:.zko.quarry,
	odehelp@DEC:.zko.quarry, sue@DEC:.zko.quarry
Subj: 	Re: shared sandbox gotcha

Josh,

Thanks for the reply.  It has me concerned that there is information out there 
regarding how to use shared sandboxes and it is not easily available to everyone 
- meaning it's in people heads and not documented yet.  If I could suggest a 
seminar or small meeting to bring shared sandbox users up-to-speed on the 
gotchas would greatly help.  I don't know how many shared sandbox users there 
are, but I think it's a shame to waste engineering cycles fumbling over the same 
mistakes.

Just a thought for the interim.

-Sue
120.2Re: shared sandbox gotchaSMURF::FILTERAutomatic Posting Software - mail to flume::puckTue Jun 08 1993 17:3617
Date Of Receipt: 	 8-JUN-1993 15:27:18.31
From: 	WASTED::jmf "Joshua M. Friedman ULTRIX SDE  08-Jun-1993 1527"
To: 	sue@wasted:zko.dec
CC: 	"Joshua M. Friedman, OSF/UNIX SDE 381-1548" <jmf@wasted:zko.dec>,
	dlong@wasted:zko.dec, mdf@wasted:zko.dec, metsky@wasted:zko.dec,
	woodburn@wasted:zko.dec, lindner@wasted:zko.dec,
	odehelp@wasted:zko.dec
Subj: 	Re: shared sandbox gotcha

Sue, thanks.  We'll see if we can get such a class together.  We did try
this before, but it's probably time again.

Also, Seattle is still wrestling with what's the "right" or best way to
do many of the things that should be routine.

-j
120.3Re: shared sandbox gotchaSMURF::FILTERAutomatic Posting Software - mail to flume::puckTue Jun 08 1993 17:3713
Date Of Receipt: 	 8-JUN-1993 15:31:03.69
From: 	QUARRY::sue "Suzanne L. Yeghiayan  08-Jun-1993 1531"
To: 	"Joshua M. Friedman, OSF/UNIX SDE 381-1548" <jmf@DEC:.zko.quarry>
CC: 	dlong@DEC:.zko.quarry, mdf@DEC:.zko.quarry, metsky@DEC:.zko.quarry,
	woodburn@DEC:.zko.quarry, lindner@DEC:.zko.quarry,
	odehelp@DEC:.zko.quarry
Subj: 	Re: shared sandbox gotcha

Okay, thanks.  Unfortunately, it's too late for Dave as the need for our shared 
sandbox has just ended.

-Sue
120.4Re: shared sandbox gotchaSMURF::FILTERAutomatic Posting Software - mail to flume::puckWed Jun 09 1993 14:0728
Date Of Receipt: 	 9-JUN-1993 13:01:15.23
From: 	QUARRY::dlong "David Long UEG"
To: 	jmf sue
CC: 	dlong lindner mdf metsky odehelp woodburn
Subj: 	Re: shared sandbox gotcha

Josh,

I have attended ODE tranining sessions.  I think what is really
needed is more of a "class" for the ODE developers rather than the
ODE customers.  By this I mean a forum for those with experience
applying ODE to larger projects to provide feedback.  During
the last few days I have been struck by the disconnect between the
documentation/recommendations we have received on using shared
sandboxes, and the personal experiences of those who have been
actually using them.  I have been given conflicting advice and the
advice of those with experience as customers of ODE has been
superior to that contained in the documentation, or provided by
word of mouth from those maintaining it.

Is there any attempt to gather requirements from ODE's user community?
I have to admit I have not actively looked for such solicitations
but if we had something close to the requirements definition part
of a phase review process someone might be able to collect useful
input on what ODE's customers deem important changes to make.

-dl
120.5Re: shared sandbox gotchaSMURF::FILTERAutomatic Posting Software - mail to flume::puckThu Jun 10 1993 15:0152
Date Of Receipt: 	10-JUN-1993 13:08:30.32
From: 	QUARRY::"[email protected]"
To: 	QUARRY::dlong
CC: 	QUARRY::jmf, QUARRY::sue, QUARRY::lindner, QUARRY::mdf, QUARRY::metsky,
	QUARRY::odehelp, QUARRY::woodburn, thomas@DEC:.zko.quarry
Subj: 	Re: shared sandbox gotcha

dl,

We have contacted the release engineering group several times concerning
requirements, and are frequently in touch with them for day-to-day issues.

Additionally we spent a week back east with the release engineers and
development engineers doing a Contextual Inquiry, the results of which will
shortly appear in the version 3.0 Project Plan.

We have also sent out questionnaires to wide distribution. The intent of all
of this was to find out what the users want and/or need.

	Mike (DECode II project leader)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Return-Path: QUARRY::dlong
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 93 10:02:57 -0700
From: QUARRY::dlong (09-Jun-1993 1002)
To: jmf sue
Cc: dlong lindner mdf metsky odehelp woodburn
Subject: Re: shared sandbox gotcha

Josh,

I have attended ODE tranining sessions.  I think what is really
needed is more of a "class" for the ODE developers rather than the
ODE customers.  By this I mean a forum for those with experience
applying ODE to larger projects to provide feedback.  During
the last few days I have been struck by the disconnect between the
documentation/recommendations we have received on using shared
sandboxes, and the personal experiences of those who have been
actually using them.  I have been given conflicting advice and the
advice of those with experience as customers of ODE has been
superior to that contained in the documentation, or provided by
word of mouth from those maintaining it.

Is there any attempt to gather requirements from ODE's user community?
I have to admit I have not actively looked for such solicitations
but if we had something close to the requirements definition part
of a phase review process someone might be able to collect useful
input on what ODE's customers deem important changes to make.

-dl
120.6Re: shared sandbox gotchaSMURF::FILTERAutomatic Posting Software - mail to flume::puckFri Jun 11 1993 10:1713
Date Of Receipt: 	10-JUN-1993 23:49:35.82
From: 	QUARRY::dlong "David Long UEG"
To: 	QUARRY::dlong, thomas@dec:.zso.n7oxx
CC: 	QUARRY::jmf, QUARRY::lindner, QUARRY::mdf, QUARRY::metsky, QUARRY::odehelp,
	QUARRY::sue, QUARRY::woodburn
Subj: 	Re: shared sandbox gotcha

Thank you for pointing out the survey, I must have skipped over the mail the
first time.  My response is in the mail and I hope you get useful feedback.  I
look forward to reading the 3.0 project plan.

-dl
120.7Re: shared sandboxAOSG::FILTERAutomatic Posting Software - mail to flume::puckTue Oct 22 1996 15:4441
Date Of Receipt: 	16-OCT-1996 14:47:17.67
From: 	FLUME::jmf "Joshua M. Friedman Digital UNIX"
To: 	kate@DEC:.zko.flume
CC: 	odehelp@DEC:.zko.flume
Subj: 	Re:  shared sandbox

Kate, I'm home sick today.  You can also talk to Grant Van Dick if 
you want to get started.  Read 'odeman mksharedsb' and see the ode
project admin guide (under ode docs under our web site:
	nsa.zk3.dec.com/rengweb

There's  some amount of overhead to the shared sandbox; unless you have
at least 3 or more people submitting changes to the same files, there's
probably an easier way to go.

-josh

p.s. you'll notice I've cc'd odehelp.

------
From [email protected]  Tue Oct 15 13:57:35 1996
Delivery-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 96 13:57:36 -0400
From: Kate Baumgartner Lowrie <[email protected]>
To: 'Josh Friedman' <[email protected]>
Cc: 'Me' <[email protected]>
Subject: shared sandbox
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 13:56:57 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Josh,

I need a shared sandbox for the vm group to test code.  Can you tell
me how I go about getting one set up?

Thanks,
Kate
120.8RE: shared sandboxAOSG::FILTERAutomatic Posting Software - mail to flume::puckTue Oct 22 1996 15:4583
Date Of Receipt: 	16-OCT-1996 15:58:21.05
From: 	FLUME::jmf "Joshua M. Friedman Digital UNIX"
To: 	[email protected]
CC: 	jfraser@DEC:.zko.flume, odehelp@DEC:.zko.flume
Subj: 	RE: shared sandbox

Kate,

OK - sounds fine.  I recommend making a new shared sb rather than
renaming one, however, since the name gets encoded multiple places
and if one is missed then there will be problems which will be
hard to trace.  You can use the same server host (og?), however, since
it's already been setup (and debugged).

-josh

-----
From [email protected]  Wed Oct 16 15:14:48 1996
Delivery-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 96 15:14:49 -0400
From: Kate Baumgartner Lowrie <[email protected]>
To: "'Joshua M. Friedman Digital UNIX'" <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: shared sandbox
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 15:14:11 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Josh,

I talked to Jon Fraser and since we won't be needing the prototype =
shared sandbox anymore, we'll just rename that.  There are five =
developers in the VM group.  Since the effects of their code are so far =
reaching, we'd like to try it out in a shared sandbox first.

Thanks,
Kate

----------
From: 	Joshua M. Friedman Digital UNIX[SMTP:jmf]
Sent: 	Wednesday, October 16, 1996 2:44 PM
To: 	kate
Cc: 	odehelp
Subject: 	Re:  shared sandbox

Kate, I'm home sick today.  You can also talk to Grant Van Dick if=20
you want to get started.  Read 'odeman mksharedsb' and see the ode
project admin guide (under ode docs under our web site:
	nsa.zk3.dec.com/rengweb

There's  some amount of overhead to the shared sandbox; unless you have
at least 3 or more people submitting changes to the same files, there's
probably an easier way to go.

-josh

p.s. you'll notice I've cc'd odehelp.

------
>From [email protected]  Tue Oct 15 13:57:35 1996
Delivery-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 96 13:57:36 -0400
From: Kate Baumgartner Lowrie <[email protected]>
To: 'Josh Friedman' <[email protected]>
Cc: 'Me' <[email protected]>
Subject: shared sandbox
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 13:56:57 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Josh,

I need a shared sandbox for the vm group to test code.  Can you tell
me how I go about getting one set up?

Thanks,
Kate