1

I am using Windows XP, with ClearCase Explorer 7.0.1.0-IFIX01.

I have the following directory:

/vob_myvob/path/to/symlink/

And it is pointing to the following directory:

/vob_exports/path/to/third/party/dependencies/v3.4.1.0/LATEST_STABLE

I want to change this so that, for my "future development" branch, I use a different symlink target than all my other branches:

/vob_exports/path/to/third/party/dependencies/v3.4.6.0/LATEST_STABLE

There are a lot of breaking changes between v3.4.1 and v3.4.6, so I need complete isolation.

Are symlinks even the right approach here? We do not have access to UCM.

Note, I am not looking to create a symbolic link. One already exists. I mention my OS because I have read on IBM's site that its not advised to mess with symlinks on Windows. I can ask our admin team to do something on the UNIX side if necessary. So far they are not very helpful, and maybe need a good pointer.

John Zabroski
  • 2,212
  • 2
  • 28
  • 54

1 Answers1

1

UCM is not related to, unless you have one UCM component per third party.

I tried the symlink approach before for third parties, but unless you are talking about source dependencies, I have since exported all those third-party binaries out of ClearCase, and in a proper artifact repository like Nexus.

That way, I can version only a file declaring the dependencies I need (a pom.xml in the case of Nexus), which means a specific branch can have a version of that file declaring a dependency to 3.4.6.0, while that same file includes 3.4.1.0 in all the other branches.

That is the current best practice (i.e. use a source control tool to version sources, not binaries)

That being said, symlink (as in cleartool ln) can work (on Windows or Unix), with only some side-effect (like this technote illustrates)

VonC
  • 1,262,500
  • 529
  • 4,410
  • 5,250