I’m currently evaluating Visual Paradigm for UML for use by our development team and I’m having some difficulties resolving conflicts during commit/update.
Specifically, the information provided around each conflict looks very cryptic and it seems to be impossible (?) to decipher (and visualise) the specific impact of accepting or reverting.
The problem is compounded when more than one conflict is present as the information for each conflict appears almost identical.
I may have missed something, please can you advise?
(P.S. I am using the latest version of Visual Paradigm for UML, Standard Edition and a subversion repository).
Thank you for your post. I suppose the Name/Value, Original Name/Value, Conflict Name/Value show in the right panel of the Teamwork Client dialog box enough to explain the conflict, isn’t it?
You may read the following page to know more the definition of different fields that appear in the right panel of the Teamwork Client dialog box:
Thanks for your response. The conflicts we expect to encounter are likely to be conflicts in the structure of sequence diagrams.
I’ve attached screen shots of something I tried.
I have probably missed something, or maybe I’m looking for something it’s not possible to do…but I couldn’t find any information in the conflict resolution screen that would help me choose (as an example) a combination of:
Committed sequence diagram - call 2: and return 3:
Conflicting sequence diagram - self-message 4:
Have I missed something?
You should encounter conflicts when comitting the 3rd image. The conflicts should consists of the coordinate and size of activations, and the sequence number. Are these conflict what you expected? If not, what do you expected to be considered as a conflict?