Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Modeling » UML2 Tools » Papyrus versus UML2tools?
Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #476172] Mon, 05 January 2009 14:15 Go to next message
Johan  is currently offline Johan Friend
Messages: 39
Registered: July 2009
Member
Hello,

While trying to understand better all the different components in the
Eclipse modelling stack, I have noticed that in addition to UML2tools,
there is also Papyrus.

It seems to me that these two projects are more or less competing (with
different strengths or weaknesses). After a coupe of hours playing with
Papyrus, it seems to be more complete GUI wise (incl SYSML support) and
have better support for code generation, although UML2tools seems to have
a more "polished" GUI in the features currently implemented, but UML2Tools
does not seem to be so prepared for code generation as Papyrus does.

Does anyone know which of the two to use, or how these two projects relate
to each other?

Kind regards,
Johan
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #476174 is a reply to message #476172] Mon, 05 January 2009 18:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed MerksFriend
Messages: 26287
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070503080809060601000405
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Johan,

I believe the idea behind the Eclipse Papyrus project is to integrate
the GUI components provided by UML2 Tools in order to create a more
integrated and fully functional final assembly.

http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt/?project=papyrus

I.e., Eclipse Papyrus is a layer on top of UML2 tools, rather than
something that competes with it.


Johan wrote:
> Hello,
>
> While trying to understand better all the different components in the
> Eclipse modelling stack, I have noticed that in addition to UML2tools,
> there is also Papyrus.
>
> It seems to me that these two projects are more or less competing
> (with different strengths or weaknesses). After a coupe of hours
> playing with Papyrus, it seems to be more complete GUI wise (incl
> SYSML support) and have better support for code generation, although
> UML2tools seems to have a more "polished" GUI in the features
> currently implemented, but UML2Tools does not seem to be so prepared
> for code generation as Papyrus does.
>
> Does anyone know which of the two to use, or how these two projects
> relate to each other?
>
> Kind regards,
> Johan
>

--------------070503080809060601000405
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-15"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Johan,<br>
<br>
I believe the idea behind the Eclipse Papyrus project is to integrate
the GUI components provided by UML2 Tools in order to create a more
integrated and fully functional final assembly.<br>
<blockquote><a
href="http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt/?project=papyrus">http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt/?project=papyrus</a><br>
</blockquote>
I.e., Eclipse Papyrus is a layer on top of UML2 tools, rather than
something that competes with it.<br>
<br>
<br>
Johan wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:078c08016a32d0a22dc575dd7e61cbea$1@www.eclipse.org"
type="cite">Hello,
<br>
<br>
While trying to understand better all the different components in the
Eclipse modelling stack, I have noticed that in addition to UML2tools,
there is also Papyrus.
<br>
<br>
It seems to me that these two projects are more or less competing (with
different strengths or weaknesses). After a coupe of hours playing with
Papyrus, it seems to be more complete GUI wise (incl SYSML support) and
have better support for code generation, although UML2tools seems to
have a more "polished" GUI in the features currently implemented, but
UML2Tools does not seem to be so prepared for code generation as
Papyrus does.
<br>
<br>
Does anyone know which of the two to use, or how these two projects
relate to each other?
<br>
<br>
Kind regards,
<br>
Johan
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>

--------------070503080809060601000405--
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #476175 is a reply to message #476174] Mon, 05 January 2009 18:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Johan  is currently offline Johan Friend
Messages: 39
Registered: July 2009
Member
Ok,

Thanks for the info! I actually thought that that was the purpose of
UML2tools as well, but perhaps UML2tools only aim to provide the editors,
not a complete "product".

Kind regards,
Johan
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #476176 is a reply to message #476175] Mon, 05 January 2009 20:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed MerksFriend
Messages: 26287
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Johan,

Who am I to comment but I think UML2 Tools is focused more on the actual
nuts and bolts of making great views rather than on gluing them all
together in a snazzy way...


Johan wrote:
> Ok,
>
> Thanks for the info! I actually thought that that was the purpose of
> UML2tools as well, but perhaps UML2tools only aim to provide the
> editors, not a complete "product".
>
> Kind regards,
> Johan
>
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #476179 is a reply to message #476175] Tue, 06 January 2009 10:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Pierre-Charles David is currently offline Pierre-Charles DavidFriend
Messages: 146
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Johan a écrit :
> Ok,
>
> Thanks for the info! I actually thought that that was the purpose of
> UML2tools as well, but perhaps UML2tools only aim to provide the
> editors, not a complete "product".

See also Kenn Hussey's answer to this question [1] in the dedicated
Papyrus newsgroup (eclipse.papyrus).

[1]
http://www.eclipse.org/newsportal/article.php?id=3&group =eclipse.papyrus#3
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #476181 is a reply to message #476179] Wed, 07 January 2009 12:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Vlad Varnica is currently offline Vlad VarnicaFriend
Messages: 546
Registered: July 2009
Location: Milton Keynes - UK
Senior Member
Papyrus is an open source project as well as Eclipse Modeling Tools.
It is therefore totally logical that users decide to only use one tool and
select the best !!

I tried both tools and Papyrus is definitely the best current open source
tool for end modeling users.

Saying that Eclipse Modeling Tools provides the core for other tools is
just out of the scope.
The reasons why it is out of the scope are:
EclipseUML2 model is the core of all the tools and it allows model
interchange.
EclipseUML2 is coming from EMF.
An interesting question could be: Which came first the hen or the egg ?
EMF or EclipseUML2. Who is the hen and who is the egg ? Who the father of
modern modeling ....

To keep it simple as possible and for developing a modeling tool here is
my return of experience:

For graphical presentation you have the choice between GMF or directly
manipulate GEF.
For model manipulation you can either use EMF (e.g. generate model from
EMF model) or directly EclipseUML2 model.

The plugin selection should therefore be based on specific needs.
For example:
GMF is amazing for DSL.
EMF is perfect for model generation
GEF & EMF are perfect together for large model scalability
EclipseUML2 metamodel standalone (e.g. without EMF) is perfect for model
manipulation
etc.....

This is my penny today.

Vlad
Omondo
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #476183 is a reply to message #476181] Wed, 07 January 2009 20:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Nicolas Rouquette is currently offline Nicolas RouquetteFriend
Messages: 142
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Arguing over which is best is, in my opinion, counter-productive and
short sighted. Eventually, UML2Tools and Papyrus will merge, that's
inevitable evolution. Until that happens, I would rather have both than
have to choose one or the other. In fact, I look forward to using both
because they represent very different paradigms for modeling and yet
they follow the same architecture principles for modeling (i.e., EMF,
GMF, OCL, transactions, validation, query,...) This kind of diversity of
modeling paradigms combined with architectural unity is unique to the
Eclipse MDT project.

-- Nicolas.

Vlad Varnica wrote:
> Papyrus is an open source project as well as Eclipse Modeling Tools. It
> is therefore totally logical that users decide to only use one tool and
> select the best !!
>
> I tried both tools and Papyrus is definitely the best current open
> source tool for end modeling users.
>
> Saying that Eclipse Modeling Tools provides the core for other tools is
> just out of the scope. The reasons why it is out of the scope are:
> EclipseUML2 model is the core of all the tools and it allows model
> interchange.
> EclipseUML2 is coming from EMF. An interesting question could be: Which
> came first the hen or the egg ? EMF or EclipseUML2. Who is the hen and
> who is the egg ? Who the father of modern modeling ....
>
> To keep it simple as possible and for developing a modeling tool here is
> my return of experience:
>
> For graphical presentation you have the choice between GMF or directly
> manipulate GEF.
> For model manipulation you can either use EMF (e.g. generate model from
> EMF model) or directly EclipseUML2 model.
>
> The plugin selection should therefore be based on specific needs. For
> example: GMF is amazing for DSL. EMF is perfect for model generation
> GEF & EMF are perfect together for large model scalability
> EclipseUML2 metamodel standalone (e.g. without EMF) is perfect for model
> manipulation
> etc.....
>
> This is my penny today.
>
> Vlad Omondo
>
>
>
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #476184 is a reply to message #476183] Thu, 08 January 2009 10:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Vlad Varnica is currently offline Vlad VarnicaFriend
Messages: 546
Registered: July 2009
Location: Milton Keynes - UK
Senior Member
I think it is important for users to understand clearly what is possible
and what is the target of each project.
All projects being almost the same, I think the market should decide which
is the best open source project and papyrus is today certainly the best.
Sorry for the others. I am not also involved in any of thess projects
because working for Omondo. Omondo is competing on the java/jee agile
modeling market and not on GMF topdown modeling marketing, we are
therefore neutral.
My comment concerns is to help the community to select the best tool and
this is a honest report based on my personal test.
The best would be to write a feature chart grouping all open source
project and explaining the differences.
It could save a lot of time for everybody.

The current problem is that the Eclipse modeling market is a mess and
nobody can see the difference between open sources projects or non free
tools.
Many users dream that everything is or would be sooner or later possible.
This is not the reality..

I am also specially fed up with open source projects taking funds from
European Government and not adding any technological value because copying
existing non free tools such as EclipseUML. This is an unfair policy
specially if ISV can't get any funding from the same institution. Large
corporations are today using public funds to reduce their Research and
development cost and not paying any fee to ISV, while the money is needed
by ISV to launch new technological projects.
Capital angels have also left the development tool market because public
funding have killed any business potential value of return on investment.

What is the most stupid in this story is that many open source projects
just copied each other (Papyrus, Topcase, Eclipse Modeling Tools) using
the same core GMF and not therefore adding any real new technological
value.
Please stop this non sense and stop spending public funds because we need
these funds to survive during the credit current crunch !!



Vlad
Omondo
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #476185 is a reply to message #476184] Thu, 08 January 2009 12:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed MerksFriend
Messages: 26287
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Vlad,

Comments below.

Vlad Varnica wrote:
> I think it is important for users to understand clearly what is
> possible and what is the target of each project.
It would be nice to hear from the project participants what they think
the targets are...
> All projects being almost the same, I think the market should decide
It always does.
> which is the best open source project and papyrus is today certainly
> the best.
Even this notion of which is best is often an issue of the context.
It's best for what purpose? Something that's best for x might not be
best for y. And all this talk probably misses the point that Papyrus as
it existed in the past, is not the same as the Papyrus version at
Eclipse. My understanding is that it's similar Ecore Tools---big shock
given some of the same people are involved---in that in provide
usability enhancements and end-user polish on top of the basic generated
GMF Ecore graphical editor...
> Sorry for the others.
I've certainly heard many good things about Papyrus, which is why we're
extremely happy with those folks being involved at Eclipse.
> I am not also involved in any of thess projects because working for
> Omondo. Omondo is competing on the java/jee agile modeling market and
> not on GMF topdown modeling marketing, we are therefore neutral.
But have a strong opinion. :-P
> My comment concerns is to help the community to select the best tool
> and this is a honest report based on my personal test.
Like customer reviews on products, it's always useful to have a spectrum
of informed opinions, and you certainly have much experience in this domain.
> The best would be to write a feature chart grouping all open source
> project and explaining the differences. It could save a lot of time
> for everybody.
Yes, that would make "best" more objective and start to make it clear
that there are many factors that go into determining what's best. Most
importantly it would allow different people to weight different factors
based on how important those factors are to them specifically.
>
> The current problem is that the Eclipse modeling market is a mess
I thought it was vibrant, rapidly growing, and diverse. :-P
> and nobody can see the difference between open sources projects or non
> free tools.
That's a problem for the non-free tools and they're the ones with
revenue to help fix whatever the problem is.
> Many users dream that everything is or would be sooner or later
> possible. This is not the reality..
The word freetard is one that I think is sometimes appropriate to use.
Some people seem to feel they are entitled to free things and if the
free things don't meet all their expectations, they feel they should be
able to demand more and simply get it. Sometimes a reality check is
needed. Good software takes time and effort to develop and there has a
cost to the supplier.
>
> I am also specially fed up with open source projects taking funds from
> European Government
I rather like that. Other people's tax money, i.e., not my personal tax
money, helping fund cool projects. Can you say freetard! :-P
> and not adding any technological value because copying existing non
> free tools such as EclipseUML.
Copying? Aren't there copyright laws that apply?
> This is an unfair policy specially if ISV can't get any funding from
> the same institution.
ISV's will make profit from their investment. Open source projects
generally just end up with a growing burden in direct proportion to
their success, and that doesn't seem quite fair either. In any case,
fairness isn't reality is it. :-P
> Large corporations are today using public funds to reduce their
> Research and development cost
Yes, nothing like corporate welfare to stimulate the economy hey?!
> and not paying any fee to ISV,
Are they using anything provided by the ISV? Why should they pay an ISV
if not?
> while the money is needed by ISV to launch new technological projects.
I need money just to buy food. We all need money. We all must produce
something of value to get it, or go on welfare and line up at the food
bank...
> Capital angels have also left the development tool market because
> public funding have killed any business potential value of return on
> investment.
Think about why a company like IBM has invested more an a billion
dollars in Linux. That's not public funding, that's private funding,
and I bet it's not helping Microsoft one iota. Similarly, IBM is likely
in for more than a 1/4 of a billion dollars for Eclipse. So you can
blame more than just public funding, you can blame the corporations
themselves. Not that finding blame will change anything...
>
> What is the most stupid in this story
Isn't politics grand?
> is that many open source projects just copied each other (Papyrus,
> Topcase, Eclipse Modeling Tools) using the same core GMF and not
> therefore adding any real new technological value.
Isn't that up to the market to determine? What are you refering to by
Eclipse Modeling Tools? Wouldn't someone adding real technological
value be able to easily out compete this stupid approach? Isn't that
what capitalism is all about. Or did some big spending free-wheeling
country drive that concept to its knees?
> Please stop this non sense and stop spending public funds because we
> need these funds to survive during the credit current crunch !!
Great soap box! But posting it on the UML Tools newsgroup which is
largely driven by Borland's funding seems odd, though certainly
entertaining. I certainly have my own frustrations with how Canadian
tax dollars are used for what I consider corporate welfare, but this
kinds of things are seemingly a fact of life, and complaining to the
people who exploit the rules for gain is pointless, because that's what
capitalism is all about. You'll need to get the rules changed, just as
there need to be a few rule changes to prevent the kind of greed and
blatant stupidity that has caused the credit crunch.
>
>
>
> Vlad
> Omondo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #492186 is a reply to message #476174] Mon, 19 October 2009 11:15 Go to previous message
Chemi is currently offline ChemiFriend
Messages: 107
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Ed Merks wrote:
> Johan,
>
> I believe the idea behind the Eclipse Papyrus project is to integrate
> the GUI components provided by UML2 Tools in order to create a more
> integrated and fully functional final assembly.
>
> http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt/?project=papyrus
>
> I.e., Eclipse Papyrus is a layer on top of UML2 tools, rather than
> something that competes with it.
Is it really a layer on top of UML2 tools? I haven't read such message
anywhere in the wiki.

Thanks,

Chemi.
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #623401 is a reply to message #476172] Mon, 05 January 2009 18:11 Go to previous message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed MerksFriend
Messages: 26287
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070503080809060601000405
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Johan,

I believe the idea behind the Eclipse Papyrus project is to integrate
the GUI components provided by UML2 Tools in order to create a more
integrated and fully functional final assembly.

http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt/?project=papyrus

I.e., Eclipse Papyrus is a layer on top of UML2 tools, rather than
something that competes with it.


Johan wrote:
> Hello,
>
> While trying to understand better all the different components in the
> Eclipse modelling stack, I have noticed that in addition to UML2tools,
> there is also Papyrus.
>
> It seems to me that these two projects are more or less competing
> (with different strengths or weaknesses). After a coupe of hours
> playing with Papyrus, it seems to be more complete GUI wise (incl
> SYSML support) and have better support for code generation, although
> UML2tools seems to have a more "polished" GUI in the features
> currently implemented, but UML2Tools does not seem to be so prepared
> for code generation as Papyrus does.
>
> Does anyone know which of the two to use, or how these two projects
> relate to each other?
>
> Kind regards,
> Johan
>

--------------070503080809060601000405
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-15"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Johan,<br>
<br>
I believe the idea behind the Eclipse Papyrus project is to integrate
the GUI components provided by UML2 Tools in order to create a more
integrated and fully functional final assembly.<br>
<blockquote><a
href="http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt/?project=papyrus">http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt/?project=papyrus</a><br>
</blockquote>
I.e., Eclipse Papyrus is a layer on top of UML2 tools, rather than
something that competes with it.<br>
<br>
<br>
Johan wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:078c08016a32d0a22dc575dd7e61cbea$1@www.eclipse.org"
type="cite">Hello,
<br>
<br>
While trying to understand better all the different components in the
Eclipse modelling stack, I have noticed that in addition to UML2tools,
there is also Papyrus.
<br>
<br>
It seems to me that these two projects are more or less competing (with
different strengths or weaknesses). After a coupe of hours playing with
Papyrus, it seems to be more complete GUI wise (incl SYSML support) and
have better support for code generation, although UML2tools seems to
have a more "polished" GUI in the features currently implemented, but
UML2Tools does not seem to be so prepared for code generation as
Papyrus does.
<br>
<br>
Does anyone know which of the two to use, or how these two projects
relate to each other?
<br>
<br>
Kind regards,
<br>
Johan
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>

--------------070503080809060601000405--
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #623403 is a reply to message #476174] Mon, 05 January 2009 18:27 Go to previous message
Johan  is currently offline Johan Friend
Messages: 39
Registered: July 2009
Member
Ok,

Thanks for the info! I actually thought that that was the purpose of
UML2tools as well, but perhaps UML2tools only aim to provide the editors,
not a complete "product".

Kind regards,
Johan
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #623404 is a reply to message #476175] Mon, 05 January 2009 20:23 Go to previous message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed MerksFriend
Messages: 26287
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Johan,

Who am I to comment but I think UML2 Tools is focused more on the actual
nuts and bolts of making great views rather than on gluing them all
together in a snazzy way...


Johan wrote:
> Ok,
>
> Thanks for the info! I actually thought that that was the purpose of
> UML2tools as well, but perhaps UML2tools only aim to provide the
> editors, not a complete "product".
>
> Kind regards,
> Johan
>
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #623412 is a reply to message #476175] Tue, 06 January 2009 10:54 Go to previous message
Pierre-Charles David is currently offline Pierre-Charles DavidFriend
Messages: 146
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Johan a écrit :
> Ok,
>
> Thanks for the info! I actually thought that that was the purpose of
> UML2tools as well, but perhaps UML2tools only aim to provide the
> editors, not a complete "product".

See also Kenn Hussey's answer to this question [1] in the dedicated
Papyrus newsgroup (eclipse.papyrus).

[1]
http://www.eclipse.org/newsportal/article.php?id=3&group =eclipse.papyrus#3
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #623477 is a reply to message #476179] Wed, 07 January 2009 12:19 Go to previous message
Vlad Varnica is currently offline Vlad VarnicaFriend
Messages: 546
Registered: July 2009
Location: Milton Keynes - UK
Senior Member
Papyrus is an open source project as well as Eclipse Modeling Tools.
It is therefore totally logical that users decide to only use one tool and
select the best !!

I tried both tools and Papyrus is definitely the best current open source
tool for end modeling users.

Saying that Eclipse Modeling Tools provides the core for other tools is
just out of the scope.
The reasons why it is out of the scope are:
EclipseUML2 model is the core of all the tools and it allows model
interchange.
EclipseUML2 is coming from EMF.
An interesting question could be: Which came first the hen or the egg ?
EMF or EclipseUML2. Who is the hen and who is the egg ? Who the father of
modern modeling ....

To keep it simple as possible and for developing a modeling tool here is
my return of experience:

For graphical presentation you have the choice between GMF or directly
manipulate GEF.
For model manipulation you can either use EMF (e.g. generate model from
EMF model) or directly EclipseUML2 model.

The plugin selection should therefore be based on specific needs.
For example:
GMF is amazing for DSL.
EMF is perfect for model generation
GEF & EMF are perfect together for large model scalability
EclipseUML2 metamodel standalone (e.g. without EMF) is perfect for model
manipulation
etc.....

This is my penny today.

Vlad
Omondo
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #623479 is a reply to message #476181] Wed, 07 January 2009 20:52 Go to previous message
Nicolas Rouquette is currently offline Nicolas RouquetteFriend
Messages: 142
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Arguing over which is best is, in my opinion, counter-productive and
short sighted. Eventually, UML2Tools and Papyrus will merge, that's
inevitable evolution. Until that happens, I would rather have both than
have to choose one or the other. In fact, I look forward to using both
because they represent very different paradigms for modeling and yet
they follow the same architecture principles for modeling (i.e., EMF,
GMF, OCL, transactions, validation, query,...) This kind of diversity of
modeling paradigms combined with architectural unity is unique to the
Eclipse MDT project.

-- Nicolas.

Vlad Varnica wrote:
> Papyrus is an open source project as well as Eclipse Modeling Tools. It
> is therefore totally logical that users decide to only use one tool and
> select the best !!
>
> I tried both tools and Papyrus is definitely the best current open
> source tool for end modeling users.
>
> Saying that Eclipse Modeling Tools provides the core for other tools is
> just out of the scope. The reasons why it is out of the scope are:
> EclipseUML2 model is the core of all the tools and it allows model
> interchange.
> EclipseUML2 is coming from EMF. An interesting question could be: Which
> came first the hen or the egg ? EMF or EclipseUML2. Who is the hen and
> who is the egg ? Who the father of modern modeling ....
>
> To keep it simple as possible and for developing a modeling tool here is
> my return of experience:
>
> For graphical presentation you have the choice between GMF or directly
> manipulate GEF.
> For model manipulation you can either use EMF (e.g. generate model from
> EMF model) or directly EclipseUML2 model.
>
> The plugin selection should therefore be based on specific needs. For
> example: GMF is amazing for DSL. EMF is perfect for model generation
> GEF & EMF are perfect together for large model scalability
> EclipseUML2 metamodel standalone (e.g. without EMF) is perfect for model
> manipulation
> etc.....
>
> This is my penny today.
>
> Vlad Omondo
>
>
>
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #623480 is a reply to message #476183] Thu, 08 January 2009 10:32 Go to previous message
Vlad Varnica is currently offline Vlad VarnicaFriend
Messages: 546
Registered: July 2009
Location: Milton Keynes - UK
Senior Member
I think it is important for users to understand clearly what is possible
and what is the target of each project.
All projects being almost the same, I think the market should decide which
is the best open source project and papyrus is today certainly the best.
Sorry for the others. I am not also involved in any of thess projects
because working for Omondo. Omondo is competing on the java/jee agile
modeling market and not on GMF topdown modeling marketing, we are
therefore neutral.
My comment concerns is to help the community to select the best tool and
this is a honest report based on my personal test.
The best would be to write a feature chart grouping all open source
project and explaining the differences.
It could save a lot of time for everybody.

The current problem is that the Eclipse modeling market is a mess and
nobody can see the difference between open sources projects or non free
tools.
Many users dream that everything is or would be sooner or later possible.
This is not the reality..

I am also specially fed up with open source projects taking funds from
European Government and not adding any technological value because copying
existing non free tools such as EclipseUML. This is an unfair policy
specially if ISV can't get any funding from the same institution. Large
corporations are today using public funds to reduce their Research and
development cost and not paying any fee to ISV, while the money is needed
by ISV to launch new technological projects.
Capital angels have also left the development tool market because public
funding have killed any business potential value of return on investment.

What is the most stupid in this story is that many open source projects
just copied each other (Papyrus, Topcase, Eclipse Modeling Tools) using
the same core GMF and not therefore adding any real new technological
value.
Please stop this non sense and stop spending public funds because we need
these funds to survive during the credit current crunch !!



Vlad
Omondo
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #623481 is a reply to message #476184] Thu, 08 January 2009 12:08 Go to previous message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed MerksFriend
Messages: 26287
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Vlad,

Comments below.

Vlad Varnica wrote:
> I think it is important for users to understand clearly what is
> possible and what is the target of each project.
It would be nice to hear from the project participants what they think
the targets are...
> All projects being almost the same, I think the market should decide
It always does.
> which is the best open source project and papyrus is today certainly
> the best.
Even this notion of which is best is often an issue of the context.
It's best for what purpose? Something that's best for x might not be
best for y. And all this talk probably misses the point that Papyrus as
it existed in the past, is not the same as the Papyrus version at
Eclipse. My understanding is that it's similar Ecore Tools---big shock
given some of the same people are involved---in that in provide
usability enhancements and end-user polish on top of the basic generated
GMF Ecore graphical editor...
> Sorry for the others.
I've certainly heard many good things about Papyrus, which is why we're
extremely happy with those folks being involved at Eclipse.
> I am not also involved in any of thess projects because working for
> Omondo. Omondo is competing on the java/jee agile modeling market and
> not on GMF topdown modeling marketing, we are therefore neutral.
But have a strong opinion. :-P
> My comment concerns is to help the community to select the best tool
> and this is a honest report based on my personal test.
Like customer reviews on products, it's always useful to have a spectrum
of informed opinions, and you certainly have much experience in this domain.
> The best would be to write a feature chart grouping all open source
> project and explaining the differences. It could save a lot of time
> for everybody.
Yes, that would make "best" more objective and start to make it clear
that there are many factors that go into determining what's best. Most
importantly it would allow different people to weight different factors
based on how important those factors are to them specifically.
>
> The current problem is that the Eclipse modeling market is a mess
I thought it was vibrant, rapidly growing, and diverse. :-P
> and nobody can see the difference between open sources projects or non
> free tools.
That's a problem for the non-free tools and they're the ones with
revenue to help fix whatever the problem is.
> Many users dream that everything is or would be sooner or later
> possible. This is not the reality..
The word freetard is one that I think is sometimes appropriate to use.
Some people seem to feel they are entitled to free things and if the
free things don't meet all their expectations, they feel they should be
able to demand more and simply get it. Sometimes a reality check is
needed. Good software takes time and effort to develop and there has a
cost to the supplier.
>
> I am also specially fed up with open source projects taking funds from
> European Government
I rather like that. Other people's tax money, i.e., not my personal tax
money, helping fund cool projects. Can you say freetard! :-P
> and not adding any technological value because copying existing non
> free tools such as EclipseUML.
Copying? Aren't there copyright laws that apply?
> This is an unfair policy specially if ISV can't get any funding from
> the same institution.
ISV's will make profit from their investment. Open source projects
generally just end up with a growing burden in direct proportion to
their success, and that doesn't seem quite fair either. In any case,
fairness isn't reality is it. :-P
> Large corporations are today using public funds to reduce their
> Research and development cost
Yes, nothing like corporate welfare to stimulate the economy hey?!
> and not paying any fee to ISV,
Are they using anything provided by the ISV? Why should they pay an ISV
if not?
> while the money is needed by ISV to launch new technological projects.
I need money just to buy food. We all need money. We all must produce
something of value to get it, or go on welfare and line up at the food
bank...
> Capital angels have also left the development tool market because
> public funding have killed any business potential value of return on
> investment.
Think about why a company like IBM has invested more an a billion
dollars in Linux. That's not public funding, that's private funding,
and I bet it's not helping Microsoft one iota. Similarly, IBM is likely
in for more than a 1/4 of a billion dollars for Eclipse. So you can
blame more than just public funding, you can blame the corporations
themselves. Not that finding blame will change anything...
>
> What is the most stupid in this story
Isn't politics grand?
> is that many open source projects just copied each other (Papyrus,
> Topcase, Eclipse Modeling Tools) using the same core GMF and not
> therefore adding any real new technological value.
Isn't that up to the market to determine? What are you refering to by
Eclipse Modeling Tools? Wouldn't someone adding real technological
value be able to easily out compete this stupid approach? Isn't that
what capitalism is all about. Or did some big spending free-wheeling
country drive that concept to its knees?
> Please stop this non sense and stop spending public funds because we
> need these funds to survive during the credit current crunch !!
Great soap box! But posting it on the UML Tools newsgroup which is
largely driven by Borland's funding seems odd, though certainly
entertaining. I certainly have my own frustrations with how Canadian
tax dollars are used for what I consider corporate welfare, but this
kinds of things are seemingly a fact of life, and complaining to the
people who exploit the rules for gain is pointless, because that's what
capitalism is all about. You'll need to get the rules changed, just as
there need to be a few rule changes to prevent the kind of greed and
blatant stupidity that has caused the credit crunch.
>
>
>
> Vlad
> Omondo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Papyrus versus UML2tools? [message #625085 is a reply to message #476174] Mon, 19 October 2009 11:15 Go to previous message
Chemi is currently offline ChemiFriend
Messages: 107
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Ed Merks wrote:
> Johan,
>
> I believe the idea behind the Eclipse Papyrus project is to integrate
> the GUI components provided by UML2 Tools in order to create a more
> integrated and fully functional final assembly.
>
> http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt/?project=papyrus
>
> I.e., Eclipse Papyrus is a layer on top of UML2 tools, rather than
> something that competes with it.
Is it really a layer on top of UML2 tools? I haven't read such message
anywhere in the wiki.

Thanks,

Chemi.
Previous Topic:Is there a Java Profile?
Next Topic:How do I access JDK classes in Class Diagrams?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Dec 21 13:00:56 GMT 2014

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02713 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.2.
Copyright ©2001-2010 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software