[news.eclipse.modeling.mdt.uml2.uml] Re: creating new metaclasses

["James Bruck" <jbruck@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Rafael


If you regenerate your model every time and keep up with metatype name
changes or changes in inheritance hierarcy ( and possible loss of inherited
attributes etc. ) as was the case with the latest changes then you should be
fine :)  [The UML spec is a constantly evolving document] ..  If you have a
look at the migration document you will see the kinds of changes you will be
subjected to.


If you would like to see a draft version of the document that descibes
various ways to extend UML you can have a look at the attachments on...
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=77413

Keep in mind this is a draft version and subject to changes or improvements
... the article called "Customizing UML: Which technique is right for you?"
is the one you might be interested in.   The other document called
"Extending UML2: Creating Heavy-weight Extensions"  is intended to be a step
by step guide to creating a Heavy-weight extension.

Any feedback / criticism is welcomed ... also if there are things left out,
please let me know.

Kenn Hussey is planning on doing a discussion at EclipseCon on this topic.

Regards,

- James.



"Rafael Chaves" <chaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eoapi0$fd7$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Hi James,
>
> > Unfortunately, you will have to either live with those warnings or
> > re-implement UML (or those portions you are interested in).
>
> I guess I can live with the warnings...
>
> > I should point out one more painful fact:  if the underlying
implementation
> > of UML that you are dependent on changes, you might have problems.
>
> But if I regenerate the model code every time a new UML2 build is
> adopted in our product (to ensure the implementation of our model
> extensions are coherent with the UML metamodel implementation), I should
> be safe, right?
>
> > Heavy-weight extensions are discouraged for these reasons ( although it
> > seems many people are doing it ;)   ).
>
> I would prefer not to do this, but stereotypes are just too limited for
> the more interesting use cases.
>
> > An article describing all the various ways to extend UML from using
keywords
> > to profiles to ultra-heavy weight extensions is almost complete and will
be
> > posted soon.
>
> Great! If you need reviewers, count me in. Just let me know where to get
> a draft from.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rafael
>