[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Hi Bogdan,
I would need one short technical discussion with the community on
the topic first.
What I currently have is a particular set (the complete one for
now) of the SCA XSDs imported as one monolithic EMF model. It is
completely ok for me right now but I see problems in the future
when somebody decides to define new SCA implementation or binding
type. Then if we go with the current approach each extension of the
SCA spec/standard will force us to recreate the metamodel (EMF
model). I would recommend to discontinue the monolitic approach and
define separate metamodels (with some references between them)
based on a single XSD from the SCA spec. This would lead to a set
of EMF models (15 for now).
It is not a challenge to define 15 EMF models (the XSDs are
defined) but I would like to ask whether the community would be
comfortable with such an approach.
I would like to discuss that point, make the proper changes if
decided, and then to attaching the code to bugzilla entry.
Having a monolithic approach that causes maintenance difficulties
as extensions are added is probably not suitable if we have the
goal of making it easy for extenders to use our code. So an approach
that allows people to easile define an extension to a base model,
or set of base models, would be much better.
15 models seems to be a lot! I know that there is quite some flexibility
in the SCA assembly - can you give us an example of the granularity of
each model?
On contribution, there's a few things to take into account. If you are
proposing a patch to the existing core sub-project, then it is ok to
just add the patch to bugzilla and we can all take a look at it. If this
is new code, to be released to EPL by SAP (or individually as yourself),
then we need to bring it into the Eclipse IP process - and we are as
well
to get started asap!
best regards
Oisin
