[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
AW: AW: [jwt-dev] [Urgent] Build against which ATL version?
|
Hi Mickael,
it's good to hear that ATLv3 works also with Ganymede. Thanks for adapting
the JWT2BPMN-transfo and the JWT2STP-IM transfo. I'll have a closer look at
the thrown exception and will refine all these transformations (JWT2BPMN,
BPMN2JWT, JWT2STPIM) in the next days.
Best regards,
Florian
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: jwt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jwt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Im
Auftrag von Mickael Istria
Gesendet: 05 May 2009 16:09
An: Java Workflow Toolbox
Betreff: Re: AW: [jwt-dev] [Urgent] Build against which ATL version?
Hi Florian, hi all,
I asked Stephane, who asked Obeo guys about ATLv3 compatibility and here are
good news:
ATL v3 works with EMF 2.4 (and lower), on Europa, Ganymede and Galileo.
Then, we can safely switch to ATL3 without any other constraint!
I'm working on it. Let's continue this discussion on the newly created bug.
Regards,
Mickael
Florian Lautenbacher a écrit :
> Hi Mickael,
>
> since this is a problem that not only we will have, but probably many
> other projects, it would be interesting what the ATL developers have to
say here.
> In principal I agree that it would be no problem to say, JWT forces
> Galileo with new EMF and ATL 3, but I don't think that many other
> projects can say the same. It is a pity that the downwards
> compatibility of ATL has not been ensured (why don't they have a specified
API??).
>
> I asked the question on the ATL newsgroup [1], so let's hope that we
> get an answer from then today.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Florian
>
> [1]
> http://www.eclipse.org/newsportal/thread.php?group=eclipse.modeling.m2
> m
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: jwt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jwt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Im Auftrag von Mickael Istria
> Gesendet: 05 May 2009 09:51
> An: Java Workflow Toolbox
> Betreff: [jwt-dev] [Urgent] Build against which ATL version?
>
> Hi all,
>
> As Florian noticed, it seems that some breaking change in ATL plug-in
> organization have the sad consequence that our current transformation
> (written against ATL 2) are not compatible with upcoming ATL 3.
>
> We have to choose against ATL we want our transformations to process.
> * If we keep ATL 2, then users will have to install ATL by themselves
> from an old update-site that won't probably be maintained anymore.
> * If w switch to ATL 3, then we depend one the newer EMF, then we
> depend on the newer platform; so that JWT can only be installed on
Galileo...
>
> IMHO, since we don't have too much users yet, I can't see any problem
> with forcing people to use Galileo when using JWT. What is your
> opinion on this topic? Should we switch to ATL3 (to be done today...) ?
>
> In case you agree, I'll make a copy of current integration-update-site
> as a ganymede-update-site, so that if someone really needs to use JWT
> over Ganymede, he'll be able to use this M7 version...
> Then if everybody is busy with something else, I could write the
> patch; but if someone else have time and motivation to do it, I'll be
> glad to let him do it, so that I'll be able to go ahead on Athena CBI
> Builder :P
>
> Regards,
> Mickael
> _______________________________________________
> jwt-dev mailing list
> jwt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jwt-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> jwt-dev mailing list
> jwt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jwt-dev
>
_______________________________________________
jwt-dev mailing list
jwt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jwt-dev
