Hi Everyone, I apologize for my premature transmission. Please ignore my previous email. :-0
On Fri, 2006-07-21 at 12:56 -0400, Tom Morris wrote: > > I hope I haven't violated the spirit of community voting. If > > I have, I apologize for that. > > I don't see a problem with doing what it takes to get a feature that you are > interested in implemented. Having said that, I think you may be > overestimating the usefulness of voting in achieving implementation. What's > really needed is more developer resources. My personal Argo to-do list > never gets short enough that I'm scouring the issue database for more work > to do. The particular issue that you're talking about is one that I've > never voted for, but have done work on. I understand that developer resources is a critical issue. If I can successfully generate income from the use of ArgoUML, it will be in my interest to devote my time, some of my developers time, and some money to the ArgoUML project. I truly believe that this issue is the obstacle that is preventing me from being successful in using ArgoUML, along with AndroMDA, as part of a open source tool chain that my company could use internally and could market to clients. In the meantime, I could devote a limited amount of time for the development of the feature now, if it involves tasks that don't require me to know to learn a lot about the internals of ArgoUML. I am somewhat familiar with MDR and the manipulation of UML models in MDR. In any case, I will certainly be happy to be of assistance in the specification and the testing of the feature. > > About a month ago, I initiated email discussions with some of > > the developers of AndroMDA http://www.andromda.org/ , > > regarding what they needed to switch from Magic Draw to ArgoUML. > > I think making it *possible* for the AndroMDA developers to use ArgoUML for > their work is a good goal, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for them to > switch once it is possible. There very well may be non-technical factors > (political, financial, familiarity, etc) at play. If they were to switch, > it would provide them with no real benefit and it would require them redo > all their diagrams for their profiles and sample projects. I completely agree, Getting AndroMDA developers to switch to ArgoUML is not an important goal. However, talking to AndroMDA developers has been useful in confirming what I believe are the possibilities of ArgoUML playing an integral role in a 100% open source tool chain for MDA development, along with AndroMDA, and to lesser extent, Eclipse. > > The fact that the tool that the AndroMDA developers use makes such a big > difference really highlights the complete failure of the OMG to do its job > properly. It's only in the past few months with the arrival of UML 2.t1 that > it's become possible for modeling tools to actually achieve useful > interchange. It'll take some time for this availability to ripple down > through the food chain. Again, I agree. It is frustrating that it has taken the OMG this long to produce a set of standards that support real model interchange. I believe that the commercial interests of tool vendors are responsible for this. Even with the UML 2.1 standard, it still lacks what almost all OMG standards lack, an verification tool or even a open source reference implementation to enforce the standard. This is where I see an important role for open source software tools, such as ArgoUML, in acting as a defacto OMG standard verification tool. Most commercial tool vendors can't be trusted to self-verify their implementations, particularly when the proper implementation of a standard is against their commerical interests. This is obviously the case with UML model and diagram interchange. cheers, roy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
