Version management in Gypsy

Cohen, Ellis S.; Soni, Deepak; Gluecker, Raimund; Hasling, William M.; Schwanke, Robert W.; Wagner, Michael

doi:10.1145/64135.65022

Cited by 25 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The data-versioning support in VC Object was inspired by RCS [Tichy 1985] and Gypsy [Cohen et al 1988] and is based on the tree model. VC Object builds on the simple support for multiple versions of objects in the Exodus Storage Manager.…”

Section: Version Control Objectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hyperform

Wiil

Leggett

1997

ACM Trans. Inf. Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Development of hypermedia systems is a complex matter. The current trend toward open, extensible, and distributed multiuser hypermedia systems adds additional complexity to the development process. As a means of reducing this complexity, there has been an increasing interest in hyperbase management systems that allow hypermedia system developers to abstract from the intricacies and complexity of the hyperbase layer and fully attend to application and user interface issues. Design, development, and deployment experiences of a dynamic, open, and distributed multiuser hypermedia system development environment called Hyperform is presented. Hyperform is based on the concepts of extensibility, tailorability, and rapid prototyping of hypermedia system services. Open, extensible hyperbase management systems permit hypermedia system developers to tailor hypermedia functionality for specific applications and to serve as a platform for research. The Hyperform development environment is comprised of multiple instances of four component types: (1) a hyperbase management system server, (2) a tool integrator, (3) editors, and (4) participating tools. Hyperform has been deployed in Unix environments, and experiments have shown that Hyperform greatly reduces the effort required to provide customized hyperbase management system support for distributed multiuser hypermedia systems.

show abstract

Section: Version Control Objectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hyperform

Wiil

Leggett

1997

ACM Trans. Inf. Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In ORION (Banerjee et al, 1987), the list is explicitly given, and each version is specified by its unique version number. Gypsy also requires an explicit list of versions (Cohen et al, 1988), but a version can be specified in several ways: by its version number, by giving a predicate on its attributes, or by invoking system-defined rules (such as "choose the most recent version"). In Shape (Mahler and Lampen, 1988), the list is specified implicitly using a sequence of design rules.…”

Section: Relationship To Configuration Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Versioning and configuration management in an object-oriented data model

Sciore

1994

VLDB Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Many database applications require the storage and manipulation of different versions of data objects. To satisfy the diverse needs of these applications, current database systems support versioning at a very low level. This article demonstrates that application-independent versioning can be supported at a significantly higher level. In particular, we extend the EXTRA data model and EXCESS query language so that configurations can be specified conceptually and non-procedurally. We also show how version sets can be viewed multidimensionally, thereby allowing configurations to be expressed at a higher level of abstraction. The resulting model integrates and generalizes ideas in CAD systems, CASE systems, and temporal databases.

show abstract

“…Transparent view: gives a viewing mechanism for a configuration from the main repository into a workspace with protection against unauthorized access, as in SMS [36].…”

Section: Understanding CM Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Past, Present, and Future of Configuration Management

Dart¹

1992

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Automated support for configuration management (CM) is one aspect of software engineering environments that has progressed over the last 20 years. The progress is seen by the burgeoning interest in CM, many technical papers and conferences involving CM, a large number of CM tool vendors, and new software development environments that incorporate CM capabilities. This paper is about future issues affecting solutions to CM problems. To put the future into perspective, it is necessary to discuss the past and present situation for CM. The past evolves around CM systems built in-house and supplemented with manual procedures and policies for executing the CM functions. The present consists of a better understanding of CM, the beginnings of a common vocabulary for CM, existence of many third-party CM tools and environments supporting CM, and recognition that a single CM system does not solve all CM problems and that there is a need for better understanding of CM process support. The future involves technical, process-oriented, political standardization and managerial challenges. These include the need to provide for new CM requirements, understand the effects of advances in environments, deal with governmental requirements on contractors for using certain CM capabilities, and acquire more management commitment for resources in solving the CM problems of an organization. One way to start addressing these challenges is through the definition of a CM services model that provides a conceptual framework for all CM capabilities. As CM is examined more closely in relation to software engineering, it becomes evident that advances in software technology are needed to aid advances in CM technology.

show abstract

Version management in Gypsy

Cited by 25 publications

References 11 publications

Hyperform

Hyperform

Versioning and configuration management in an object-oriented data model

The Past, Present, and Future of Configuration Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About