Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Modeling » EMF » Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3)
Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #645322] Thu, 16 December 2010 16:04 Go to next message
No real name is currently offline No real name
Messages: 8
Registered: December 2010
Junior Member
Hi,

I wonder whether someone could shed light on how the Ecore meta-metamodel can be extended with one or more additional concepts? As an example, let's say that we would like to add a concept EEntity to Ecore as a subtype of EClassifier. Clearly, this concept should be supported by the EMF framework and made available when creating Ecore models (.ecore). Is this possible in an intuitive manner?

I've search after information on this, but I've not been able to localise such.

Also, I'm aware that such an extension may compromise the compatibility with existing tools and technologies based on the Ecore meta-metamodel. However, this is intended as a prototype.

Any help, tips or links are appreciated!

Have a good day!
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #645334 is a reply to message #645322] Thu, 16 December 2010 16:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eike Stepper is currently offline Eike Stepper
Messages: 5545
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi e.c.l.i.p.s.e.n.e.w.s.g.r.o.u.p,

Extending Ecore is not recommended because you would inherit internal implementation that can change at any time and break you. Forking and and *changing* Ecore sounds even worse. Both seems possible though.

Cheers
/Eike

----
http://www.esc-net.de
http://thegordian.blogspot.com
http://twitter.com/eikestepper



Am 16.12.2010 17:04, schrieb e.c.l.i.p.s.e.n.e.w.s.g.r.o.u.p@gmail.com:
> Hi,
>
> I wonder whether someone could shed light on how the Ecore meta-metamodel can be extended with one or more additional concepts? As an example, let's say that we would like to add a concept EEntity to Ecore as a subtype of EClassifier. Clearly, this concept should be supported by the EMF framework and made available when creating Ecore models (.ecore). Is this possible in an intuitive manner?
>
> I've search after information on this, but I've not been able to localise such.
>
> Also, I'm aware that such an extension may compromise the compatibility with existing tools and technologies based on the Ecore meta-metamodel. However, this is intended as a prototype.
>
> Any help, tips or links are appreciated!
>
> Have a good day!
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #645341 is a reply to message #645322] Thu, 16 December 2010 16:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 26141
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
As Eike suggests, extending Ecore is not recommended. Try to get by
annotating Ecore instead. I imagine that entity could be supported by
having EClasses that have some special EClasses in its super types and
that at runtime these would be instances that implement those special
interfaces. Perhaps you want to generate some other stuff too, but I
expect you could drive that with annotations...


e.c.l.i.p.s.e.n.e.w.s.g.r.o.u.p@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wonder whether someone could shed light on how the Ecore
> meta-metamodel can be extended with one or more additional concepts?
> As an example, let's say that we would like to add a concept EEntity
> to Ecore as a subtype of EClassifier. Clearly, this concept should be
> supported by the EMF framework and made available when creating Ecore
> models (.ecore). Is this possible in an intuitive manner?
>
> I've search after information on this, but I've not been able to
> localise such.
>
> Also, I'm aware that such an extension may compromise the
> compatibility with existing tools and technologies based on the Ecore
> meta-metamodel. However, this is intended as a prototype.
>
> Any help, tips or links are appreciated!
>
> Have a good day!
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #645423 is a reply to message #645322] Fri, 17 December 2010 09:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
No real name is currently offline No real name
Messages: 8
Registered: December 2010
Junior Member
Hi Eike and Ed,

Thanks for your responses!

Yes, I'm fully aware that the internal representation may change, etc. Nonetheless, as this new meta-metamodel is intented purely as a proof-of-concept implementation this is not important.

Thus, I just wonder how to do it, I'm not interested in why I shouldn't, if you see what I mean? Smile

Anybody who has done this or knows how to extend the model?
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #645547 is a reply to message #645423] Fri, 17 December 2010 19:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 26141
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
You can extended it like any other model. There's a tutorial about how
to define an extended model...


e.c.l.i.p.s.e.n.e.w.s.g.r.o.u.p@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi Eike and Ed,
>
> Thanks for your responses!
>
> Yes, I'm fully aware that the internal representation may change, etc.
> Nonetheless, as this new meta-metamodel is intented purely as a
> proof-of-concept implementation this is not important.
>
> Thus, I just wonder how to do it, I'm not interested in why I
> shouldn't, if you see what I mean? :)
>
> Anybody who has done this or knows how to extend the model?
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #645605 is a reply to message #645547] Sat, 18 December 2010 18:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
No real name is currently offline No real name
Messages: 8
Registered: December 2010
Junior Member
Hi Ed,

Thanks for responding.

I know I can extend it by importing Ecore.ecore as a resource.

However, I would like to use this extended model as the meta-metamodel of the EMF framework. In other words, it should be possible to instantiate the revised Ecore.ecore model (M3) in order to create a metamodel (M2) whose constructs can be used to create models (M1).

As a start, how can I add concepts to Ecore which are made available in the Ecore editor?

Have a good day.
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #645623 is a reply to message #645605] Sat, 18 December 2010 23:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 26141
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Your question is completely open ended. You've said you want to add
concepts and all you've said is it's called Entity... How that relates
to the rest of Ecore is entirely mysterious. How one would create an
entity? How would one persist it? What kind of reflection does it
support. The questions are endless. Unless you modify Ecore directly,
you should expect to define your own editor, and in the tutorial I
mentioned. How you use that model to create instances I simple can't
answer in a vacuum...


e.c.l.i.p.s.e.n.e.w.s.g.r.o.u.p@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi Ed,
>
> Thanks for responding.
>
> I know I can extend it by importing Ecore.ecore as a resource.
>
> However, I would like to use this extended model as the meta-metamodel
> of the EMF framework. In other words, it should be possible to
> instantiate the revised Ecore.ecore model (M3) in order to create a
> metamodel (M2) whose constructs can be used to create models (M1).
>
> As a start, how can I add concepts to Ecore which are made available
> in the Ecore editor?
>
> Have a good day.
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #645690 is a reply to message #645322] Sun, 19 December 2010 22:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
No real name is currently offline No real name
Messages: 8
Registered: December 2010
Junior Member
I will be more accurate.

To make it simple, let's say that me want to add a new kind of classifier, named EEntity. This concept should inherit from EClassifier and have a containment relation to EAttribute. Thus, here an entity is basically just an container for attributes. Persistence, reflection, and other properties should be equal to those of EClass.

Is this detailed enough or do you need more info?
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #645695 is a reply to message #645690] Mon, 20 December 2010 01:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 26141
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Comments below.

e.c.l.i.p.s.e.n.e.w.s.g.r.o.u.p@gmail.com wrote:
> I will be more accurate.
> To make it simple, let's say that me want to add a new kind of
> classifier, named EEntity. This concept should inherit from
> EClassifier and have a containment relation to EAttribute. Thus, here
> an entity is basically just an container for attributes.
Just like an EClass.
> Persistence, reflection, and other properties should be equal to those
> of EClass.
So how is it not an EClass? So you'll want create methods in EFactory,
or your need an extension to EFactory.
>
> Is this detailed enough or do you need more info?
In the end, I'm not the one who needs to solve your problem. :-P

So far you've only convinced me that your creating yet another type of
EClass, but I fail to see the point. You'll need something like
EObject with an eEntity method that returns an EEntity? As well as a
bunch of reflective methods of accessing its attributes? You'll need an
extended EFactory with a create method that takes an EEntity?
EAttributes can be contained by something other than an EClass now; that
will surprise existing parts of the framework. It sounds like you're
going down a rat hole to me...
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #645725 is a reply to message #645695] Mon, 20 December 2010 09:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
No real name is currently offline No real name
Messages: 8
Registered: December 2010
Junior Member
Hi Ed,

No of course not, I'm merely looking for guidance. Smile

I feel that we're gradually getting there, great! Please, don't be too concerned with the purpose of the example I describe. It's just an example to illiustrate what I seek information on. (An entity concept that only relates some attributes seem rather pointless, I know.) That said, I wonder how to extend the framework in a conceptual way.

You're talking about how to make an extended Factory etc. I've downloaded the EMF source and have navigated through the numerous files. Could you please narrow down what packages and files I should concentrate on in order to adapt the framework for a new concept (if possible)? It's a little bit overwhelming to grasp everything without some documentation. If there is any EMF contributor/developer documentation available, that is a valuable resource for sure.
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #645849 is a reply to message #645725] Mon, 20 December 2010 19:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 26141
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Comments below.

e.c.l.i.p.s.e.n.e.w.s.g.r.o.u.p@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi Ed,
>
> No of course not, I'm merely looking for guidance. :)
>
> I feel that we're gradually getting there, great! Please, don't be too
> concerned with the purpose of the example I describe. It's just an
> example to illiustrate what I seek information on. (An entity concept
> that only relates some attributes seem rather pointless, I know.) That
> said, I wonder how to extend the framework in a conceptual way.
>
> You're talking about how to make an extended Factory etc. I've
> downloaded the EMF source and have navigated through the numerous
> files. Could you please narrow down what packages and files I should
> concentrate on in order to adapt the framework for a new concept (if
> possible)?
The nature of the concept you're introducing will determine where to look...
> It's a little bit overwhelming to grasp everything without some
> documentation. If there is any EMF contributor/developer documentation
> available, that is a valuable resource for sure.
There's the EMF book and all the stuff on the documentation page, but
that's it...
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #646631 is a reply to message #645849] Wed, 29 December 2010 12:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
No real name is currently offline No real name
Messages: 8
Registered: December 2010
Junior Member
Good day,

Will the information in the book explain what I'm after? (I doubt that?)
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #646646 is a reply to message #646631] Wed, 29 December 2010 15:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 26141
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Given your goal isn't entirely clear, I doubt you'll find the specific
information you're after anywhere. That being said, if you want to
extend something, understanding that something in great detail,
including how end users make use of it, seems essentially.


e.c.l.i.p.s.e.n.e.w.s.g.r.o.u.p@gmail.com wrote:
> Good day,
>
> Will the information in the book explain what I'm after? (I doubt that?)
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #646680 is a reply to message #645322] Wed, 29 December 2010 20:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
No real name is currently offline No real name
Messages: 8
Registered: December 2010
Junior Member
Thanks for your rapid reply!

What do you not understand with what I described? I will be glad to provide more details!

Let's make it very simple. How can I add a concept EClass2 to Ecore that is an exact copy of EClass and its respective classes/interfaces, reflection properties, persistence etc.? It should extend EClassifier. Let's start with how to make this new concept available in the Ecore editor. (Users can then instantiate EClass2 instead of EClass in their metamodels.) This will be very helpful!
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #646744 is a reply to message #646680] Thu, 30 December 2010 16:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 26141
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Comments below.

e.c.l.i.p.s.e.n.e.w.s.g.r.o.u.p@gmail.com wrote:
> Thanks for your rapid reply!
>
> What do you not understand with what I described?
You want some kind of extension to Ecore, but its purpose is mysterious.
> I will be glad to provide more details!
I'm sure, but why don't you just go off and learn how Ecore works and
then ask questions about that?
>
> Let's make it very simple. How can I add a concept EClass2 to Ecore
> that is an exact copy of EClass and its respective classes/interfaces,
> reflection properties, persistence etc.?
By adding exactly all the things you see that support EClass. Surely
you don't expect me to enumerate them all on demand?
> It should extend EClassifier.
Of course. That's what EClass doess.
> Let's start with how to make this new concept available in the Ecore
> editor.
You'll have to write (generate) your own editor, Ecore isn't designed to
be extended nor is the editor extensible.
> (Users can then instantiate EClass2 instead of EClass in their
> metamodels.) This will be very helpful!
Keep in mind that I do have my own work to do and there are already more
than enough people with concrete problems who need help.
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #646774 is a reply to message #645322] Fri, 31 December 2010 03:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
No real name is currently offline No real name
Messages: 8
Registered: December 2010
Junior Member
It seems to me that you apparently don't want to give specific details on how to revise the framework in the manner I've described. You state that my question is mysterious and not concrete, but I do believe it's both concrete and straightforward.

Of course, you are perfectly entitled not to give specific information. If this is the case, may I ask why?

Anyway, I was merely looking for some guidelines to get going.
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #646828 is a reply to message #646774] Fri, 31 December 2010 17:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 26141
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Comments below.

e.c.l.i.p.s.e.n.e.w.s.g.r.o.u.p@gmail.com wrote:
> It seems to me that you apparently don't want to give specific details
> on how to revise the framework in the manner I've described.
You'll find that I have a years long track record of giving specific
details.
> You state that my question is mysterious and not concrete, but I do
> believe it's both concrete and straightforward.
I'm sure you do, but I'm not sure anyone can argue that EClass2 is a
concrete concept.
>
> Of course, you are perfectly entitled not to give specific information.
You'll find that specific questions typically yield specific answers
while open ended general questions often get questions as answers.
> If this is the case, may I ask why?
I'm a very busy person and I'm not getting the impression you're doing
all that much to find answers on your own. You might, for example, look
at all the places that EClass is used in the framework. You might
explore how EClass and EDataType are used in the rest of the model, and
so on.
>
> Anyway, I was merely looking for some guidelines to get going.
Extending Ecore is something I always recommend against, so you're
asking for guidelines to navigating a path I consider best avoided...
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #1064679 is a reply to message #645322] Thu, 20 June 2013 14:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Darren Hurt is currently offline Darren Hurt
Messages: 15
Registered: July 2009
Junior Member
Hi Ed.

I am a newcomer to the 'mainstream' MDA community, but quite an old hat when it comes to devising MDA architecture and practising MDA principles (about 15 years in the private MDA 'backstreet' ).
I think the lack of ability to extend the root M3 model in mainstream modelling tools etc. is somewhat holding back the full potential of MDA.
Let me elaborate why I believe this seemingly absurd statement.
In my previous job I had a large hand in devising and implementing a modelling structure whereby we had our own M3 model (according to OMG terminology) that was it's own meta-model etc., then an M2 model to define the meta-model of our model and the model itself where actual business models were created for end products. This was the central piece in a platform for creating solutions in the capital markets arena, but the platform was in fact completely generic. We devised our own user language that could be used at all levels (M3, M2, M1 and M0). It is used to define the logic of extra derived properties, validation constraints and queries of the model, meta-models and running system. I guess the user language was performing a role similar to what I see with OCL in the 'mainstream' stuff at the moment (e.g. with OCLInEcore invariants, derived ops, queries etc.), but with the added ability to provide extra behaviour in the final running (M0) system. However, these things were invented by us entirely in isolation, so it's interesting to see many of these similar ideas in the mainstream and OMG standards. I guess it was and is an insular organisation that I worked for, and that we were an insular group within it Smile.

Anyway, my point is, that the modelling environment we had was enormously richer than that offered by the mainstream 'ecore'/MOF specifications, as we could extend our own root model however we liked. This recursion was tremendously powerful and enabled us to do some amazing things, from defining our own kinds of model inheritances (single, multiple, none etc.) to defining the forms for editing the models in the models themselves, with crazy recursive stuff like be able to create the forms to edit the types that make up the forms model in forms defined by instances of the very types that made up the forms model itself etc., or writing validation functions for the validation function types that themselves were instances of the validation function types etc. etc. In fact a big point about it is that the tooling of the entire model (editors, manipulation actions etc. etc.) was largely defined in this M3 model itself, enabling it to kind of tool itself if you see what I mean. The whole look of the editors and the actions available, the validation rules etc. could be utterly changed without writing (OR GENERATING!) any Java code (some user language code and meta-model changes only). When combined with subjectivity and functional read-only-ness rules in the meta-models (which we also modeled) it even enabled me to devise ways of giving entirely different views and editing permissions for models to different kinds of users.

For these reasons I can see exactly why someone would want (very much) to be able to override the M3 model itself, and it is a shame that this is not yet a mainstream possibility without inventing your own structures that do not comply with the standards.
Personally I feel that the importance of the somewhat restricting OMG standards are over-stated, and that overly zealous conformance to these standards and associated process can serve to greatly slow down the rate of technological progress.
I see enormous potential in a modelling framework that allows extension of the root model, and if only I could persuade my former company to donate what we have to the open source community, or to develop a product based only on the modelling framework we devised, then it would be very interesting to see how it was received as a standalone product in its own right Smile.

regards,

Darren






Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #1064729 is a reply to message #1064679] Thu, 20 June 2013 16:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 26141
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Darren,

Comments below.

On 20/06/2013 4:07 PM, Darren Hurt wrote:
> Hi Ed.
>
> I am a newcomer to the 'mainstream' MDA community, but quite an old
> hat when it comes to devising MDA architecture and practising MDA
> principles (about 15 years in the private MDA 'backstreet' ).
> I think the lack of ability to extend the root M3 model in mainstream
> modelling tools etc. is somewhat holding back the full potential of MDA.
I doubt that. What makes M3 so special?
> Let me elaborate why I believe this seemingly absurd statement.
> In my previous job I had a large hand in devising and implementing a
> modelling structure whereby we had our own M3 model (according to OMG
> terminology) that was it's own meta-model etc., then an M2 model to
> define the meta-model of our model and the model itself where actual
> business models were created for end products. This was the central
> piece in a platform for creating solutions in the capital markets
> arena, but the platform was in fact completely generic. We devised our
> own user language that could be used at all levels (M3, M2, M1 and
> M0). It is used to define the logic of extra derived properties,
> validation constraints and queries of the model, meta-models and
> running system. I guess the user language was performing a role
> similar to what I see with OCL in the 'mainstream' stuff at the moment
> (e.g. with OCLInEcore invariants, derived ops, queries etc.), but with
> the added ability to provide extra behaviour in the final running (M0)
> system. However, these things were invented by us entirely in
> isolation, so it's interesting to see many of these similar ideas in
> the mainstream and OMG standards. I guess it was and is an insular
> organisation that I worked for, and that we were an insular group
> within it :).
>
> Anyway, my point is, that the modelling environment we had was
> enormously richer than that offered by the mainstream 'ecore'/MOF
> specifications, as we could extend our own root model however we liked.
I'm doubtful of the final self defining meta model needing to be
extensible and I'm doubtful how the representation for instance could
deal with such extensibility.
> This recursion was tremendously powerful and enabled us to do some
> amazing things, from defining our own kinds of model inheritances
> (single, multiple, none etc.) to defining the forms for editing the
> models in the models themselves, with crazy recursive stuff like be
> able to create the forms to edit the types that make up the forms
> model in forms defined by instances of the very types that made up the
> forms model itself etc., or writing validation functions for the
> validation function types that themselves were instances of the
> validation function types etc. etc. In fact a big point about it is
> that the tooling of the entire model (editors, manipulation actions
> etc. etc.) was largely defined in this M3 model itself, enabling it to
> kind of tool itself if you see what I mean.
It's impossible to know concretely what this all implies.
> The whole look of the editors and the actions available, the
> validation rules etc. could be utterly changed without writing (OR
> GENERATING!) any Java code (some user language code and meta-model
> changes only). When combined with subjectivity and functional
> read-only-ness rules in the meta-models (which we also modeled) it
> even enabled me to devise ways of giving entirely different views and
> editing permissions for models to different kinds of users.
It's not even clear here which of all the M3 though M0 this might apply,
or only to the M0 things.
> For these reasons I can see exactly why someone would want (very much)
> to be able to override the M3 model itself, and it is a shame that
> this is not yet a mainstream possibility without inventing your own
> structures that do not comply with the standards. Personally I feel
> that the importance of the somewhat restricting OMG standards are
> over-stated, and that overly zealous conformance to these standards
> and associated process can serve to greatly slow down the rate of
> technological progress.
I doubt anyone (at the OMG) will accuse EMF of being overzealous about
conforming to OMG standards.
> I see enormous potential in a modelling framework that allows
> extension of the root model, and if only I could persuade my former
> company to donate what we have to the open source community, or to
> develop a product based only on the modelling framework we devised,
> then it would be very interesting to see how it was received as a
> standalone product in its own right :).
I'm certainly curious, but also dubious. In any case, nothing prevents
someone from extending Ecore but all the downstream frameworks that know
only about Ecore won't understand anything about such extension so the
value is limited.
>
> regards,
>
> Darren
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #1064772 is a reply to message #1064729] Thu, 20 June 2013 23:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Darren Hurt is currently offline Darren Hurt
Messages: 15
Registered: July 2009
Junior Member
Ed,
Thanks for your replies. It is of course impossible for you to get much of a feel for what I describe without really seeing it However, this is difficult to accomplish for a number of reasons.
Extending the self referential model is tricky, and needs a little care (in the mysterious framework i refer to) but it does work and is very powerful, requiring a few choice bits of data in the bootstrapping methods occasionally to prevent recursion issues etc.
I get your point about downstream tools, but in the framework I describe that was not an issue as any extra tooling could be invented in the context of the model itself, and in an extremely modular way that largely avoided polluting inappropriate parts of the model.

Anyway, I understand the difficulties in opening up the Ecore M3 model, but at the same time I wanted to point out that doing so can - as I found - be extremely worthwhile.

Anyway, just wondering how I might start getting involved and contributing some of my modelling ideas to Eclipse etc? Its tricky when one works for a very small firm with 0 clout, and that does not have the resources to sponsor such activity...
It feels like I'd have to go it alone, but I am completely unsure of the business model surrounding open source software contribution (I.e. how will I make a living from it if I'm giving it away Smile - I guess that's why I'm working for someone else Smile).


Re: Extending the Ecore meta-metamodel (M3) [message #1064800 is a reply to message #1064772] Fri, 21 June 2013 07:44 Go to previous message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 26141
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Darren,

Comments below.

On 21/06/2013 1:58 AM, Darren Hurt wrote:
> Ed,
> Thanks for your replies. It is of course impossible for you to get
> much of a feel for what I describe without really seeing it However,
> this is difficult to accomplish for a number of reasons.
> Extending the self referential model is tricky, and needs a little
> care (in the mysterious framework i refer to) but it does work and is
> very powerful, requiring a few choice bits of data in the
> bootstrapping methods occasionally to prevent recursion issues etc.
> I get your point about downstream tools, but in the framework I
> describe that was not an issue as any extra tooling could be invented
> in the context of the model itself, and in an extremely modular way
> that largely avoided polluting inappropriate parts of the model.
> Anyway, I understand the difficulties in opening up the Ecore M3
> model, but at the same time I wanted to point out that doing so can -
> as I found - be extremely worthwhile.
I'm always open to concrete new ideas...
>
> Anyway, just wondering how I might start getting involved and
> contributing some of my modelling ideas to Eclipse etc?
Just do it. :-P

Generally, to make contributions, you'll need to be in a position to be
able to make your contributions available under the EPL license.

http://www.eclipse.org/legal/CLA.php

Most projects are more than willing to work closely with contributors,
and essentially all projects are using git, so it's easy to create a
fork for managing your own playground. So find something that interests
you, look at the bugzillas open for the project, and see if any of those
look interesting to try to address in order to learn about the project...

> Its tricky when one works for a very small firm with 0 clout, and that
> does not have the resources to sponsor such activity...
In general clout is proportional to involvement and contribution. He/she
who writes the code has the clout. The company I worked for didn't feel
that EMF was something they could convince other companies to use (so
they invented impressive technologies like SDO instead), and this was a
company with very impressive clout. Popularizing EMF turned out to be
much easier than they imagined, but who's heard of SDO?
> It feels like I'd have to go it alone, but I am completely unsure of
> the business model surrounding open source software contribution (I.e.
> how will I make a living from it if I'm giving it away :) - I guess
> that's why I'm working for someone else :)).
Yes, that's indeed an open problem solved in a number of different ways,
none of which are perfect. Being the leading expert of a software base
that's widely adopted is certainly an opportunity for associated service
work. Alternatively, providing commercial products on top of an open
base is another approach. Government sponsorship is also occasionally
possible.
>
>
>
Previous Topic:[EMF/GMF] - Performance issue on load and save model.
Next Topic:EMF sometimes doesn't resolve Proxy
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Oct 26 05:21:28 GMT 2014

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03013 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

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