Hi! > I'm a little bit disappointed that this mail hasn't won our attention, > or at least nobody followed up on the conversation.
I enjoyed Tom's mail: it was brilliant, I agree with him! Too sad he wants to (kind of) stop working on ArgoUML after 0.26, I'm still hoping that he'll stay with us, at least for the Eclipse related activities for ArgoUML. > > The two big things that need to be prioritized against everything else > > are UML 2.x and Eclipse integration. As Bogdan pointed out, they are > > independent, but both of them are big chunks of work and have an > > impact on almost everything else. Each has a different impact on > > different feature sets. > > I agree, but we have to be careful. Those tasks are (or seem to be) > very hard (talking about time), so we have to do a good plan about who > could/will be involved, and how many time he is able of working on it. > Once we know about it, we can plan if it should be developed on trunk > or in branches. Regarding UML 2.x: yes, highest priority! I remember when we needed to switch from NSUML to MDR, and started with a code base full of NSUML dependencies. We did it, and so I'm convinced we'll make it to UML 2.x! Don't be afraid if this task will have a large portion of tedious routine work going through the whole code base: if it's clear what to do, I'll volunteer for contributing to the routine work, like I did back then with eliminating NSUML dependencies. Regarding eclipse: it's OK to me to have Undo, Copy/Paste and Multi model/project management only in the eclipse version. Otherwise, I'm not that after eclipse integration, but I understand it's importance for the ArgoUML user acceptance. > I've thought on this before, but I haven't found the right answer. > Should we support both profiles? Or should we update our users to 2.x > automagically? > I'm sure that we can achieve 1.4->2.x, but not sure about the other way. For me it's OK to just do the 1.4->2.0 update of project automatically and don't support the way back. Also, It's OK for me to begin with a 2.0 version without new 2.0 features (for better tool integration, as Tom said), and add things later when it became stable. > > The real question is > > whether or not it's already too late for those tools to be based on > > any ArgoUML code. Brian and Bogdan have done great work on the > > Eclipse integration, but Ganymede already bundles support for a bunch > > of the UML diagrams and there's a full open source UML 2 editor, > > called Papyrus, being proposed for the 2009 Eclipse release. > > http://wiki.eclipse.org/MDT/Papyrus-Proposal > > http://www.papyrusuml.org/ I don't believe it's too late, because of the assets we have: our target language support for example (PHP, Java, C++ and other CG/RE capabilities), and the cognitive support (critics). These are features that the "new" eclipse integrated tools lack of, while we have them already. > [19:32] <melter> there hasn't been a release in over a year and > a half > [19:33] <__alex> currently there is one going on, but it's not a > stable > one > [19:34] <penyaskito> melter: we want to make shorter the SDLC of > ArgoUML > [19:34] <penyaskito> melter: I want to see 0.26 out before november, > and I would like to see 0.28 in about six months > [19:35] <melter> penyaskito: even having bug fix releases monthly > would at least show the project has some life > [19:35] <melter> like 0.26.1, 0.26.2, even just for a spelling > fix > > I think that we could do that. What about working on Eclipse & UML & > new features in trunk, and having a 0.26 branch where we can work on > bugfixes? If we're meticulous with creating Issues and good SVN > commits logs, it's not hard to know what is a bugfix and what is a new > feature, and patching the branch accordingly. I tend to review all the > mails of argouml-commits, I'm sure that most of you do too. A very good point! We should get used to maintain a branch for the last stable release, also commit bug fixes there and release bug fix releases regularly based on that. That would be a great quick-win with relatively low effort! Regards, Thomas -- GMX Kostenlose Spiele: Einfach online spielen und Spaß haben mit Pastry Passion! http://games.entertainment.gmx.net/de/entertainment/games/free/puzzle/6169196 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
