Hello Peter,
> -----Original Message-----
> To: rose_forum@Rational. Com
> Subject: Rose file format (was Re: (ROSE) M in a circle??)
>
>
>
> "Arne G. Styve" wrote:
> >
> > >From the first moment I started using Rose (1 1/2 years ago),
> I was very
> > surprised to see the way the model is stored. How can you
> possible be able
> > to ensure a robust environment for your model when using a standard flat
> > textfile to store the model in !!!!
>
> Actually, I'm more confident with a text format file
> than with a binary format. When something is broken
> it's a lot easier for a technician to see the fault
> than with a binary format.
I was thinking more in the line of a real solid database as a repository for
the model and it's elements. The DB-systems are designed initially for
multiple users accessing the same set of data, so why re-invent the wheel ?
Also todays DB-systems are very stable, and are highly optimized, so speed
should be of now problem. Using a DB as repository, each element in your
model can be managed (packages, diagrams, classes, even
associations/relations, attributes and operations if desired). Say you want
to make changes to a diagram in Package A, and not modify any of the classes
in that package. One of the classes beeing Class C. My collegue, say Jo, is
working on another diagram (say a sequence diagram) in Package B, in which
the Class C is beeing used. While working in the diagram, Jo needs to add a
method to the Class C. What will you do then ??!?!??
"Hi Arne, can you chek in Package A, caus' I need to update Class C"......so
much for configuration management.....
So my point is: Flatfiles, no matter on which format, I just can't see any
benefits at all. Greate, you can read the propriatory petal-file, but if I
wanted to read a 1000 page pice of text (covering 3 classes...), I would
have preferred a good book instead.
There are other tools, like CoolJex for instance, which do have a
DB-repository of the kind I would like to see in Rose. Unfortunally (at
least what I saw of CoolJex when I last had a peak at it), it lacks the
"Microsoft Syndrome" when it comes to integrateability and
userfriendliness.....
So, it's back to the good old: can't have it both is suppose....
>
> It's a trade-off between many things, like speed to
> load a file etc.
>
> As a precaution, set the Rose file extensions to be
> treated as binaries in your CM tool. Then you are
> not tempted to merge them outside Rose.
>
Thanks for the advice Peter :-) Any ideas of how to make Rose a safer
multiuser tool are highly appreciated :-)
Regards Arne
> /Peter
> --
> Peter Lindgren Bachelor of Computer
> Engineering
> ERIEYE C2 Software Design
http://www.ericsson.com/erisoft
Get your own AWACS: http://www.ericsson.se/microwave/2-Products/erieye.asp
--- Opinions above, expressed or implicit, are my personal opinons only ---
************************************************************************
* Rose Forum is a public venue for ideas and discussions.
* For technical support, visit http://www.rational.com/support
*
* Admin.Subscription Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Archive of messages:
http://www.rational.com/products/rose/usergroups/rose_forum.jtmpl
* Other Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To unsubscribe from the list, please send email
*
* To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Subject:<BLANK>
* Body: unsubscribe rose_forum
*
*************************************************************************
************************************************************************
* Rose Forum is a public venue for ideas and discussions.
* For technical support, visit http://www.rational.com/support
*
* Admin.Subscription Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Archive of messages:
http://www.rational.com/products/rose/usergroups/rose_forum.jtmpl
* Other Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To unsubscribe from the list, please send email
*
* To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Subject:<BLANK>
* Body: unsubscribe rose_forum
*
*************************************************************************
