Re: [ee4j-pmc] Project/Specification dependencies

["Kevin Sutter" <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks, Wayne, for this relationship graph.
 I learned something new with this effort (Graphviz and dot).  It's
quite the complex graph, but I guess that's a good view of the work we
have in front of us.  Thanks again.

---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter 
STSM, MicroProfile and Java EE architect
e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx     Twitter:  @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)    
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter



From:      
 Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:      
 EE4J PMC Discussions
<ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:      
 05/15/2018 11:47 AM
Subject:    
   Re: [ee4j-pmc]
Project/Specification dependencies
Sent by:    
   ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

I just pushed some updates. In the process, I moved a
couple of entries to fix alphabetical ordering. It just occurred to me
that this could make accepting pull requests harder. In the short term,
let's restrict ourselves to relationship additions and changes and save
ordering/structural changes for a later clean up.

Wayne

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:28 PM, Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I'll reiterate that this is a work-in-progress. It's not
quite yet suitable for framing.

Wayne

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:21 PM, Guillermo González de
Agüero <z06.guillermo@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Thanks for this great work Wayne! I'm sure it will be
pretty useful for people to understand the relationship between the different
parts.

El mar., 15 may. 2018 4:11, Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
escribió:
I've been experimenting with using a graph to understand
the relationships between the projects, I started capturing the relationships
between the EE4J projects and specifications and came up with the attached
image.

The process of building this was a useful exercise for
me to get a little more familiar with the projects.

It's incomplete. Specs, projects, and relationships are
missing. I'm presenting this here as a proof of concept.

Dotted boxes represent specifications. Round rectangle
nodes are projects that maintain the specifications (e.g Eclipse Project
for Stable Jakarta EE Specifications "maintains" a bunch
of different specifications). Round rectangle nodes with thick lines are
are projects that implement specifications (or otherwise implement stuff,
like Eclipse Grizzly).

This may be better represented as UML, but I decided to
go with a simple digraph for now.

I'm using Graphviz/dot, and have done nothing to try and
influence the layout.

I may be trying to accomplish too much with a single diagram.

It may be more useful to capture these relationships with
some kind of more general metadata. I decided to just use Graphviz notation
to capture the relationships for now since I could do so quickly. We can
maybe convert this to a different format later if we decide that it makes
sense.

Does this (or something like this) seem useful?

If it seems useful, I'll put the dot file into our repository
so that I can accept pull requests :-)

Wayne

-- 
Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects
The Eclipse Foundation
_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc

_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc




-- 
Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects
The Eclipse Foundation



-- 
Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects
The Eclipse Foundation_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc