On 30/08/2024 08:01, Felix Schumacher wrote:
Am 29.08.24 um 18:29 schrieb Mark Thomas:
On 29/08/2024 15:34, Felix Schumacher wrote:
<snip/>
While I don't object to buying a license, I would love to know, which
diagram you looked at and what exactly did not work out. (the
activation stuff in mermaid is brittle, but I think I managed to get
them all right)
I couldn't find a way to get the gap in the activation of Catalina
between the call to setParentClassLoader() and start(). I see how you
fixed that. Nice.
There are a couple of places where the message arrows don't quite meet
up with the activation bar correctly and the await note isn't quite in
the right place.
I only see one gap at the message await() from Catalina to itself.
The note is a bit better placed, when we use "note right" (or even "note
left") instead of "note right of Catalina".
To get even more of the original look, we can use UML style, by adding
"skinparam style strictuml" and to mimic the original drawing even more,
we can switch off the actors at the bottom, by specifying "hide
footbox". (full code at the end)
You have convinced me. I did a little more playing around and if I add
explicit return messages it fixes the incomplete message line and the
activation bars look better. I can even put the await note exactly where
I want it :)
I think we switch to PlantUML and keep Visual Paradigm as a fallback option.
Thanks for all your input on this. It has been really helpful.
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
