Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [modeling-pmc] Re: New project -- EMF Registry
Ed,

Comments below.

Ed Willink wrote:
Hi Mike

Comments inline.

    Ed

Mike Milinkovich wrote: 
Ed,

A few comments:

(a) This sentence below is indecipherable to me. I know I'm a world famous
modeling redneck, but does this seriously need to have _nine_ TLAs in it? Is
there any way that this can be explained in some form of human readable
prose? (Yes, I am grinning while writing this!)

This problem was addressed in a modeling project independent fashion by the
GMT UMLX Model Registry which migrated to the M2M QVT Declarative Model
Registry. In order to support the migration of an OCL editor from M2M QVT
Declarative to MDT OCL, a further migration of the Model Registry is
necessary.
How about?
This problem was addressed by the GMT UMLX project. A Model Registry was
developed that was independent of any particular modeling project. This
solution migrated to the M2M QVT Declarative project. A further
migration is necessary to allow the MDT OCL project to provide the
OCL editor currently forming part of the M2M QVT Declarative project.
A few weeks ago I asked if it would make sense to contain this technology in the OCL project because from what I gather, much of this solve problems very specific to OCL and QVT, i.e., trying to come up with a name/identifier for each package rather than using it's namespace URI.
(b) This statement below makes me wonder if this _really_ needs to be a
separate project? Is "availability" a good enough reason to create a whole
new project? (This is really the PMC's call, but I thought I would raise it.

This proposal advocates making the Model Registry available as an
independent project, facilitating its availability and usage in a modeling
project independent fashion. An EMFT positioning makes this simple but
critical modeling functionality available to all EMF users eliminating
dependency problems. It avoids the need for a Model Registry migration to
MDT OCL.
Before EMFT really got going, I proposed this as a direct contribution to EMF. It has instead
been bouncing around and been inconveniently accessible to be widely used.
Since the beginning it's never been entirely clear if you meant this to be a registry for all models, or more of an extended package registry.  Often it seemed more to be the former...

Direct contibution to EMF is an option, but EMF is very mature and so understandably
resistant to novel functionality. EMFT provides its incubators.
Yes, EMFT is meant to be an incubator for new components.

Contribution to EMF/Index was investigated, but EMF/Index is about smart use of known models
rather than location of models.
This is a pretty vague statement that even experts would have trouble turning into a meaningful interpretation and it's this type of vagueness that's made it difficult to figure out exactly what you're proposing and why you consider it to be a generally reusable component.  There is for example
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=220218
which sounds similar on the surface but the design I expect to see for that sounds very little like what you're proposing.

A facility for many possible projects needs to be independent even if it is relatively small.
(c) This proposal is missing a Scope section, which we generally consider to
be the most important of all. The content seems to be there, so a simple
re-organization could likely address this concern.
DLTK is a recommended proposal. It has no scope.

Since the content is adequate, is a restructuring necessary. If so, now or when other review comments
have accrued.
I also mentioned that its important to have an explicit scope section and asked you to look at the other recent proposals.  I'm not sure what's to be gained by ignoring this or pushing back on it?
Mike Milinkovich
Office: +1.613.224.9461 x228
Mobile: +1.613.220.3223
mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx

  
-----Original Message-----
From: Anne Jacko [mailto:anne.jacko@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: September-15-09 2:19 PM
To: Wayne Beaton; Mike Milinkovich; PMC members mailing list
Cc: Ed Willink
Subject: New project -- EMF Registry

Mike, Wayne, Modeling PMC (cc Ed) --

Please review and comment on the following new proposal from Ed
Willink: http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/emf-registry/

Thanks.

Anne Jacko
Eclipse Foundation
503-784-3788

    



  


_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc

Back to the top