1 / 20

Visualizing Parallel Workspace Activities

Visualizing Parallel Workspace Activities. Anita Sarma, Andr é van der Hoek Department of Informatics & Institute for Software Research University of California, Irvine asarma@ics.uci.edu, andre@ics.uci.edu. A Typical Development Scenario. Pete’s workspace. Ellen’s workspace. A. B. C. D.

khanh
Télécharger la présentation

Visualizing Parallel Workspace Activities

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Visualizing Parallel Workspace Activities Anita Sarma, André van der HoekDepartment of Informatics & Institute for Software ResearchUniversity of California, Irvineasarma@ics.uci.edu, andre@ics.uci.edu

  2. A Typical Development Scenario Pete’s workspace Ellen’s workspace A B C D E C CMrepository

  3. Direct Conflicts Pete’s workspace Ellen’s workspace A B C D E C CMrepository Conflicting changes to the same artifact

  4. Indirect Conflicts Pete’s workspace Ellen’s workspace A B C D E C CMrepository Conflicting changes to different artifacts

  5. Traditional CM Approaches

  6. Key Observations • A CM workspace in reality provides two kinds of isolation: • Good isolation • Shields developers from parallel changes to artifacts • Bad isolation • Hides knowledge of what artifacts other developers are changing • Opportunities for breaking isolation are limited • Based on repository information only • Initiated by developer only • Addressing direct conflicts only Goal: Break bad isolation while retaining good isolation

  7. Hypothesis By continuously informing developers of ongoing changes, it is possible to reduce the number and magnitude of conflicts.

  8. Approach: Palantír • Keep workspaces insulated, but not isolated • Increase awareness of ongoing workspace activities • Collect • Distribute • Organize • Present • Do so automatically and continuously • Push information • Thereby, move earlier the point at which potential direct and indirect conflicts can be detected

  9. Palantír • Organizes and displays events • Parallel workspace activity • Severity of changes - “The amount (size) of change between two versions of an artifact” • Work in progress • Impact of changes - “The effect of changes on my current work(space)” • Work in progress

  10. Palantír Architecture Visualizations Visualizations Extractor Extractor Internal state Internal state Event service Event wrapper Event wrapper CM client CM server CM client CMrepository Workspace Workspace

  11. Visualizations: Scrolling Marquee • Pros: • Compact • Very non obtrusive • Cons: • No history • Too many events

  12. Visualizations: Tabular View • Pros: • Simple • Quick summary • Cons: • Too much information • Changes not related • No event history

  13. Visualizations: Explorer View • Pros: • Familiar • Changes at a glance • Cons: • Too much information • Changes not related

  14. Visualizations: Fully Graphical • Pros: • Most comprehensive • Pair-wise conflict • Cons: • Non-intuitive • Requires more work to scale

  15. Fully Graphical

  16. Integration Experience • RCS • Pessimistic CM system • 500 lines of Java code • Single day • CVS • Optimistic CM system • 500 lines of Java code • Single day • JSVN • Optimistic CM system • 500 lines of Java code • Few days

  17. Conclusions • Palantír is a novel prototype that brings awareness to CM workspaces • Which artifacts are being changed by whom? • What is the severity of the changes? • Push instead of pull • Palantír is independent of the type of CM system used • Palantír was successfully integrated with RCS, CVS, and JSVN

  18. Future Work • Case study to determine the effectiveness of Palantír • Does it reduce the number of conflicts? • Does it improve coordination? • Does it speed up development time? • Further support for indirect conflicts • Impact analysis • Dependencies • Develop additional visualizations

  19. Related Work • CVS and many other CM systems • Only e-mail notifications • Coven • Developers do not know in advance what they will change • BSCW, TUKAN, COOP/Orm • No pair-wise comparisons, no severity measure • State Treemap, Jazz • No pair-wise comparisons

More Related