[news.eclipse.technology.kepler] Re: Thoughts on a Common Project Model

[Joakim Erdfelt <joakim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sounds like you are referring to a hierarchy of models.
Not a hierarchy within a single model.

I agree that a hierarchy of models would allow for some useful sharing 
of concepts (Organization, License, Prerequisites, etc...) but I wonder 
if a good solution could be found.

A parent/child relationship could be established, but would that just 
make the model more difficult to utilize?  A parent/child relationship 
would make sense when presented on disk, but be more difficult to walk 
when accessed via remote resource or database.  Might even require an 
in-memory merge of the information prior to utilizing.  Merging would 
also complicate the read/write of the model information.   Not to 
mention the parent/child relationship isn't typically found in a many of 
the models that we eventually hope to write adaptors for.

I can think of a few ways to look at this problem.
* giant ball of mud model.
* componentized model.
* parent/child model.
* namespaced/linked model.

More thought will need to be put into this.

- Joakim


Jesse McConnell wrote:
> When I look at the types and volume of this kinda information I wonder 
> if a hierarchy of this common model information is in order?
>
> If not then the volume of duplication of information will be large, 
> leading to errors and out of date information.
>
> but then being self contained means you don't have to worry about 
> accessing parent models and merging the information.  and then you have 
> access controls to modifying that parent information
>
> maybe a template produced by an organization like eclipse or the asf 
> would be sufficient..
>
> strong thoughts either way?
>
> jesse
>
>
> Joakim Erdfelt wrote:
> > Joakim Erdfelt wrote:
> >  > I've started to take a stab at identifying the bits and pieces of 
> > all of
> > > the other models that are out there.
> > >
> > > See: http://joakim.erdfelt.com/kepler/common_models_matrix.html
> > > Other Formats: http://joakim.erdfelt.com/kepler/
> > >
> > > I've looked at LSM, Maven 1, Maven 2, Eclipse Plug-in Manifest, Java 
> > > Manifest, OSGi, DOAP, sf.net, freshmeat.net, google code, yum, apt, 
> > > osdir.com, and the FSF/GNU software map.
> > >
> > > This is just a first pass, I'll be working out some grouping of 
> > > concepts shortly.
> > >
> > > Hopefully this can get some serious discussion started.
> >
> > Here's my first stab at organizing concepts / groups etc ...
> >
> > http://joakim.erdfelt.com/kepler/common_project_model_freemind.html
> >
> > I used the freemind utility at http://freemind.sf.net/ to 
> > create/visualize this model.
> > Things in Bold Green I feel are "Core" concepts.
> > The rest should probably be defined as kepler extensions/facets (of 
> > some sort)
> >
> > p.s: I don't have access to edit the wiki (yet)
> >
> > - Joakim