Are you model-based without a Pro Cloud Server License?

[mse]

I have a repository where our requirements are stored in Jama. I also have enterprise architect. I thinking of importing requirements into a requirements package in EA from Jama. I will perform all linkage to design in EA. Jama will not know about the links however. Is this still model-based? Anyone else using similiar setups? Note: I cannot get a license for the Jama integration for EA, so I got to work with what I have.

[PDC]

To get all acaedmic about it... I don't believe your toolset choices dictate your engineering philosophy. It should probably be other other way round - chose a toolset that best supports and executes your engineering philosophy.
If your design kowledge is manged and controlled in a model-based toolset that may include EA/Jama/others (as opposed to e.g. documentation or cave paintings), then you can argue that you are operating in a model-based design enterprise. Sounds like that's what you're doing, and I don't know why anyone would care to argue against you!

[mse]

I agree totally. However, the problem was that so-called digital thread and trying to avoid loss of information. For example, with my limitations and without having to purchase a license. I can only do so much to show design information in Jama. If you want to see the diagrams and traceability between requirements and design, you have to view it in EA. I know Jama says they can do design and all, but I think it's just a requirements tool in the end.

All requirements, regardless of tool however, will be maintained in Jama. Maybe this is the way it was intended anyhow. Afterall, we it's not expected that one single tool will do everything. People do however want to make sure that consistency is kept between environments.

[PDC]

Absolutely agree. 'Being MBSE' does not mean 'using one tool'. It's probably the exception where a single tool is used, and that's why there are so many integration tools, plugins etc (and so many threads on these forums with people addresing integration issues).

I'm a big advocate of 'use the right tool for the job'. So for me, EA, Jama, DOORS, Cameo, (Jira...?!)...... they are all legit tools for managing requirements in an MBSE environment. but when people suggest 'adding Sequence diagrams into DOORS' I start to twitch

Sounds to me like you have the right mindset though. Digital thread, traceability, consistency... they are fundamental concepts addressed by MBSE, and your chosen toolset (in your case, maybe Jama + EA) is the mechanism for efficiently managing those concepts.