[news.eclipse.modeling.mdt.uml2] Re: Operations Package Export in GenMod

["James Bruck" <jbruck@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi John,

If possible, please attach all your bug fixes in a patch and I'll make sure 
they get committed.
Thanks,
- James.

"John T.E. Timm" <johntimm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message 
news:d41f266c50c9ac365405458eaee97c5b$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Hi James,
>
> I will submit a defect. I also noticed some issues with switching back and 
> forth between using operations packages and not using operations packages 
> between a model and subsequent derived models. More specifically, I found 
> that the EOCL_ENV field does not get generated properly if you switch back 
> and forth. I made some adjustments to a couple of the other templates 
> (namely OperationsClass.javajet and insert.javajetinc) to ensure that 
> EOCL_ENV gets generated properly.
>
> Thanks,
>
> JT
>
> James Bruck wrote:
>
>> Hi John,
>
>> This does seem like a bug.    Please raise a defect on UML2 and possibly 
>> contribute a patch if you have one.
>> This could possibly be a candidate for the maintenance release.
>
>> Cheers,
>> - James.
>
>> "John T.E. Timm" <johntimm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message 
>> news:321b6d7c3f8041ac23eb451481ec4d97$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>I ended up customizing the manifest.mfjet template to get the required 
>>>behavior. This does appear to be a shortcoming of the current 
>>>implemention. If I create a model that uses operations packages and then 
>>>another model which extends the first, I will get code that doesn't 
>>>compile until the manifest file is manually updated.
>>>
>>> JT
>>>
>>> John T.E. Timm wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there a way to specify in the GenModel that the Operations Package 
>>>> should get exported so that it can be used by other projects that 
>>>> further specialize the model and also use an Operations Package? I am 
>>>> currently adding an entry to the manifest.mf file manually.
>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>> JT
>>>
>>>> NOTE: I originally posted this message in eclipse.model.mdt, but feel 
>>>> that perhaps the UML2 newsgroup is more appropriate.
>>>
>>>
>
>