Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

gt; will watch the video. >>> >>> >>>> The issue I have found is that if the class contains a java.util.List, >> it >>>> won't import the whole class (typically repositories or menu classes). >>>> Haven't find the time to check why or solv

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

Set, but not >> a Java - Util - List element. That might be the reason, just hopping there >> is a way to add the List to make it work too. >> >> Cesar. >> >> -----Original Message- >> From: Óscar Bou - GOVERTIS [mailto:o@govertis.com] >> Sen

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

w.youtube.com/watch?v=gmf8CswqKcs >> >> Cesar. >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Stephen Cameron [mailto:steve.cameron...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 4:42 AM >> To: users@isis.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

java code >> into the UML model, it's just a matter of drag and drop and into the >> diagram canvas and select which properties and operations (actions) you >> want to be shown, very convenient to exclude the obvious from the diagram, >> like getters and setters, maybe disable

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

ava - Util - List element. That might be the reason, just hopping there > is a way to add the List to make it work too. > > Cesar. > > -Original Message- > From: Óscar Bou - GOVERTIS [mailto:o....@govertis.com] > Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 2:37 PM > To: users@isis

RE: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

outube.com/watch?v=gmf8CswqKcs Cesar. -Original Message- From: Stephen Cameron [mailto:steve.cameron...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 4:42 AM To: users@isis.apache.org Subject: Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow Spent some time on this today, but did not

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

, > your choice. > > I will keep working on it, looking good so far. > > Cesar. > > -Original Message- > From: Óscar Bou - GOVERTIS [mailto:o....@govertis.com] > Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 4:53 AM > To: users > Subject: Re: Thinking about re-introducing UM

RE: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

, your choice. I will keep working on it, looking good so far. Cesar. -Original Message- From: Óscar Bou - GOVERTIS [mailto:o@govertis.com] Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 4:53 AM To: users Subject: Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow For you to know. I was just

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

Hi Jeroen, My experience is similar. I was always suspicious of the "code generation " approach, inevitably gives 2 "sources" that get out of step. The only good exception I saw was TogetherJ where "the code is the model" Best Regards Mike Burton (Sent from my iPhone) > On 15 Nov 2015, at

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

Hi all. First of all, the good news for all romantics: Together is still alive !!! See [1]. [2] says it fully supports Eclipse. Really interesting, Jeroen, introducing Lombok. Look how clear and concise is the Aggregate in [3] expressed in C#. For me, my immediate need is to have a visual

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

For you to know. I was just reading about “AgileJ” [1] (the video at [2] is excellent. It perfectly summarizes the points-of-view expressed here about the evolution last years of UML usage in dev teams). But I’ve also found the Papyrus Eclipse project [3]. Seems to be really alive (there has

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

On Sunday, 15 November 2015 5:37 AM, Dan Haywood wrote: > Thanks for this James. > My observation re: using the (relational) data model as the initial input > though is that this is likely to lead to rather coupled code, ultimately > not maintainable.

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

All very interesting! Over the years I tried numerous modelling tools and only the low-tech ones stayed: drawing on a whiteboard, using coloured index cards [1] (learned from Dan) or using a simple online tool like yUML [2]. And I only use them to communicate the broad picture or for explorative

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

Thanks for this James. My observation re: using the (relational) data model as the initial input though is that this is likely to lead to rather coupled code, ultimately not maintainable. For example, typically we would model a one:many relationship will a simple foreign key. But if that was

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

I actually tested out using Telosys to generate an isis app from database definition. It did work but of course it meant i did the ER first. I used MySQL, did the ER modelling on the workbench, forward engineered into the database and then used telosys scripts to generate a functional Isis

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

Really interesting, James. I didn’t knew about it … I’ll take a look. Thanks, Oscar > El 14 nov 2015, a las 16:00, James Agada escribió: > > I actually tested out using Telosys to generate an isis app from database > definition. It did work but of course it meant

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

On 13 November 2015 at 09:45, Óscar Bou - GOVERTIS wrote: > > Hi all. > > I’m considering re-introducing UML Class diagrams in our workflow mainly > for: > - graphically design the domain entities. > - modeling relationships. > - agree with names of properties, collections

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

Many thanks, Stephen for this detailed explanation. The problem I’m facing is that I intent to communicate the developers what’s the model to implement. And I usually don’t find big mistakes in action code, but what mostly forces us to refactor is miscommunication regarding the Domain

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

Yep, I'm thinking something similar. Will take a look at capableobjects, but think I'll make plantuml my main focus. Perhaps you could see what the plantunl/xtext/Eclipse story is, and whether it fits your desired work flow . Cheers, Dan On 14 Nov 2015 17:23, "Óscar Bou - GOVERTIS"

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

I'll look at it in detail. Thanks! Oscar > El 14 nov 2015, a las 18:34, Dan Haywood > escribió: > > Yep, I'm thinking something similar. > > Will take a look at capableobjects, but think I'll make plantuml my main > focus. Perhaps you could see what the

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

Really nice to hear is your full circle, Dan :) Mine also. I started all this by using the excellent Bold for Delphi components, now Capable Objects MDriven Framework [1]. It was wonderful to design in Rational Rose your entities, including constraints in OCL, and after that generate the code,

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

Hi, Very interesting, and I'll follow with great interest. I forgot to mention that my main use-case, in the short term, is user generated forms, so I am looking at the problem 'domain' from a different perspective. If I wanted to generate Java classes with Isis annotations I would use the

Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

Hi all. I’m considering re-introducing UML Class diagrams in our workflow mainly for: - graphically design the domain entities. - modeling relationships. - agree with names of properties, collections and actions needed. It would be wonderful if the UML solution could also be “integrated” with

Re: Thinking about re-introducing UML in our workflow

Hi Oscar, In a qualified way I think your idea has merit. I have never used UML for design, but a few years ago I decided to take a good look at it and see it if was useful. The idea of being able to draw a diagram and generate code from it seemed sensible, after all that is what is done by most