Andreas said: > I felt the same way, when I contributed to the UML2 transition, as you > know. But you came across like you wanted to do some experimental > branch of the UML2 transition to see if (or how) you could do this > with those diagram modules. It seemed to me, that you were not > interested in contributions at that point.
I am interested in contributing to the euml model implementation I simply don't feel qualified to lead. However in the absence of anyone else I'm doing my best. The reason I got involved with creating these diagrams was in response to some emails I saw saying that there were too many conditions being spread around regarding UML2/UML1.4. I simply wanted to demonstrate that with the correct patterns in use that shouldn't be necessary. In fact all the Figs I've committed so far extend the UML1.4 Figs with no change and class and use case diagrams operate reasonably well. The things I think will be a problem I can't test yet because of things that are not yet implemented in euml. Hence my work there. I'm also trying to make sense of how association navigability is managed. The navigability seems to be reversed in euml and I'm trying to understand why. Different docs describe navigability and different UML2 tools generate different XMI for the same A->B model. If this must be changed on the GUI side then its a good example for me to demonstrate in the UML2 class diagram. But if all the GUI needs to change because of this then I don't see why we don't change the euml behaviour. Even if the euml implementation is different the model interface should be consistent. - I'm diverging - I'll start another thread for this. I had got the impression that there'd be more people working on UML2 after 0.28 and it made sense for me to work to complete the XML property panels at the same time. Right now though it feels like I'm doing most everything (built on top of the hard labour of others of course) > At this point, we wanted to target the latest official release > (read: UML 1.4). Everything else is too far away to depend on... In that case I would advise that you simply continue that way. All my suggestions have been for UML1.4 diagrams to continue to be supported. Even if those Diagrams and Figs move to a module then they would stay with the same package names and visibility. So just including that jar means anything built against the current diagrams should continue to work in the next release. I'm hoping my previous suggestions will allow module developers such as yourself some stability when working on your modules. We can then deprecate old classes with instructions of how to upgrade to UML2 at some later date. Hopefully my suggestions will allow anyone to contribute whatever they wish whether it is UML2, GEF separation or any other new feature or bug fix to ArgoUML without having to wait for any milestone or fork work. However, here's hoping we can drum up some more help with euml. I'll post back later with some specific areas I've been looking at that I'm unsure of. Regards Bob. ------------------------------------------------------ http://argouml.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=450&dsMessageId=2382584 To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [[email protected]]. To be allowed to post to the list contact the mailing list moderator, email: [[email protected]]
