Home » Archived » EPF » How to *implement* the process?
| How to *implement* the process? [message #31001] |
Thu, 22 March 2007 18:26  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: user.domain.invalid
Hi *,
as an EPF newbie I have carefully read the tutorials without having big
problems so far. Good Job!
From my understanding I do now have a process - defined by myself
and/or derived from e.g. openUP.
How do I proceed now?
In other words:
* How do I *implement* the process?
* - or - if you prefer another picture "how do I instantiate a
concrete project using the newly defined process" ?
Or do I have a misunderstanding here? E.g.: is that what I have defined
now already an instantiation of a process?
your help is *very* appreciated, - Hg
|
|
| |
| Re: How to *implement* the process? [message #31109 is a reply to message #31039] |
Mon, 26 March 2007 13:11  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: georg.thien.freenet.de
Hi Aitor,
I'm not quite sure if we are talking about the same things. But that's
to my own lack of knowledge regarding the topic.
From what I have read so far it sounds like the EPF is not suitable for
doing what I want to do it its current stage.
For clarification:
Let's assume I have a simple project, - something simple like "Hello World".
Let's assume that there is only one usecase, e.g. I want the resulting
executable to be executed from the command line, and it has to print out
the word "greeting".
Where can I enter the project name "Hello World". Is the "configuration"
used for that?
Best regards, - Hans
Aitor Bediaga wrote:
> As far as I know, there is people now working on the process enactment
> or process instantiation. I'm researching about process enactment
> mechanisms for EPF and I have concluded that there are at least twoe
> alternatives:
>
> 1. Modify or extend the SPEM/UMA metamodel, adding
> "concrete"/"instances" of elements to the metamodel (Activity -->
> ConcreteActivity or TaskKind --> Task).
>
> 2. Instead of extending SPEM you can specify another metamodel which
> allows you representing an instance of a process model. A instantiation
> of a process requires user interaction so be carefull, it isn't an
> automatic task...
>
> About process execution, I think that it would be very usefull a
> transformation between a process instantiation and a BPEL process
> (business process) or XPDL process (Workflow).
>
> What is you opinion?
>
> Regards,
>
> Aitor Bediaga
> Engineer
> European Software Institute (www.esi.es)
> aitor[_dot_]bediaga[_@_]esi[_dot_]es
>
|
|
|
| Re: How to *implement* the process? [message #31144 is a reply to message #31109] |
Mon, 26 March 2007 21:02 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
I think you're asking about two things here. One is, how do I customize
a process for my little Hello World project. The other question is, how
do I adopt the process in my day-to-day project activities.
To answer the first question, there are a lot of things you can do to
customize the process (customizing is usually easier than starting from
scratch). Editing the configuration is just one of them. The question
is, what do you need to change? If you just want to add your project
name the the existing web pages, you can make simple edits to the
Welcome page. You can add your own templates if you want. Or you can
perform more significant customizations by adding plug-ins or removing
content such as tasks and capability patterns. The changes you make in
the process depend on your needs, the demands of the organization, and
your team's ability to adopt process changes. If you give some details I
could be more helpful.
In terms of adopting a process, you'll want to do that incrementally.
Start with the area you struggle with the most. If you have ambiguous
requirements and your stakeholders are displeased, then adopt
requirements management first. If you have trouble stabilizing builds
and delivering software, work on the project management discipline and
begin delivering software iteratively.
If this doesn't answer your question, maybe you could be more specific
about what you want to achieve.
- Jim Ruehlin
jruehlin@us.ibm.com
Hans Kiehn wrote:
> Hi Aitor,
>
> I'm not quite sure if we are talking about the same things. But that's
> to my own lack of knowledge regarding the topic.
>
>
> From what I have read so far it sounds like the EPF is not suitable
> for doing what I want to do it its current stage.
>
>
> For clarification:
>
> Let's assume I have a simple project, - something simple like "Hello
> World".
>
> Let's assume that there is only one usecase, e.g. I want the resulting
> executable to be executed from the command line, and it has to print
> out the word "greeting".
>
>
> Where can I enter the project name "Hello World". Is the
> "configuration" used for that?
>
> Best regards, - Hans
>
>
> Aitor Bediaga wrote:
>> As far as I know, there is people now working on the process
>> enactment or process instantiation. I'm researching about process
>> enactment mechanisms for EPF and I have concluded that there are at
>> least twoe alternatives:
>>
>> 1. Modify or extend the SPEM/UMA metamodel, adding
>> "concrete"/"instances" of elements to the metamodel (Activity -->
>> ConcreteActivity or TaskKind --> Task).
>>
>> 2. Instead of extending SPEM you can specify another metamodel which
>> allows you representing an instance of a process model. A
>> instantiation of a process requires user interaction so be carefull,
>> it isn't an automatic task...
>>
>> About process execution, I think that it would be very usefull a
>> transformation between a process instantiation and a BPEL process
>> (business process) or XPDL process (Workflow).
>>
>> What is you opinion?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Aitor Bediaga
>> Engineer
>> European Software Institute (www.esi.es)
>> aitor[_dot_]bediaga[_@_]esi[_dot_]es
>>
|
|
|
| Re: How to *implement* the process? [message #577232 is a reply to message #31001] |
Fri, 23 March 2007 07:04 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
As far as I know, there is people now working on the process enactment or
process instantiation. I'm researching about process enactment mechanisms
for EPF and I have concluded that there are at least twoe alternatives:
1. Modify or extend the SPEM/UMA metamodel, adding "concrete"/"instances"
of elements to the metamodel (Activity --> ConcreteActivity or TaskKind
--> Task).
2. Instead of extending SPEM you can specify another metamodel which
allows you representing an instance of a process model. A instantiation of
a process requires user interaction so be carefull, it isn't an automatic
task...
About process execution, I think that it would be very usefull a
transformation between a process instantiation and a BPEL process
(business process) or XPDL process (Workflow).
What is you opinion?
Regards,
Aitor Bediaga
Engineer
European Software Institute (www.esi.es)
aitor[_dot_]bediaga[_@_]esi[_dot_]es
|
|
|
| Re: How to *implement* the process? [message #577274 is a reply to message #31039] |
Mon, 26 March 2007 13:11 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: georg.thien.freenet.de
Hi Aitor,
I'm not quite sure if we are talking about the same things. But that's
to my own lack of knowledge regarding the topic.
From what I have read so far it sounds like the EPF is not suitable for
doing what I want to do it its current stage.
For clarification:
Let's assume I have a simple project, - something simple like "Hello World".
Let's assume that there is only one usecase, e.g. I want the resulting
executable to be executed from the command line, and it has to print out
the word "greeting".
Where can I enter the project name "Hello World". Is the "configuration"
used for that?
Best regards, - Hans
Aitor Bediaga wrote:
> As far as I know, there is people now working on the process enactment
> or process instantiation. I'm researching about process enactment
> mechanisms for EPF and I have concluded that there are at least twoe
> alternatives:
>
> 1. Modify or extend the SPEM/UMA metamodel, adding
> "concrete"/"instances" of elements to the metamodel (Activity -->
> ConcreteActivity or TaskKind --> Task).
>
> 2. Instead of extending SPEM you can specify another metamodel which
> allows you representing an instance of a process model. A instantiation
> of a process requires user interaction so be carefull, it isn't an
> automatic task...
>
> About process execution, I think that it would be very usefull a
> transformation between a process instantiation and a BPEL process
> (business process) or XPDL process (Workflow).
>
> What is you opinion?
>
> Regards,
>
> Aitor Bediaga
> Engineer
> European Software Institute (www.esi.es)
> aitor[_dot_]bediaga[_@_]esi[_dot_]es
>
|
|
|
| Re: How to *implement* the process? [message #577294 is a reply to message #31109] |
Mon, 26 March 2007 21:02 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
I think you're asking about two things here. One is, how do I customize
a process for my little Hello World project. The other question is, how
do I adopt the process in my day-to-day project activities.
To answer the first question, there are a lot of things you can do to
customize the process (customizing is usually easier than starting from
scratch). Editing the configuration is just one of them. The question
is, what do you need to change? If you just want to add your project
name the the existing web pages, you can make simple edits to the
Welcome page. You can add your own templates if you want. Or you can
perform more significant customizations by adding plug-ins or removing
content such as tasks and capability patterns. The changes you make in
the process depend on your needs, the demands of the organization, and
your team's ability to adopt process changes. If you give some details I
could be more helpful.
In terms of adopting a process, you'll want to do that incrementally.
Start with the area you struggle with the most. If you have ambiguous
requirements and your stakeholders are displeased, then adopt
requirements management first. If you have trouble stabilizing builds
and delivering software, work on the project management discipline and
begin delivering software iteratively.
If this doesn't answer your question, maybe you could be more specific
about what you want to achieve.
- Jim Ruehlin
jruehlin@us.ibm.com
Hans Kiehn wrote:
> Hi Aitor,
>
> I'm not quite sure if we are talking about the same things. But that's
> to my own lack of knowledge regarding the topic.
>
>
> From what I have read so far it sounds like the EPF is not suitable
> for doing what I want to do it its current stage.
>
>
> For clarification:
>
> Let's assume I have a simple project, - something simple like "Hello
> World".
>
> Let's assume that there is only one usecase, e.g. I want the resulting
> executable to be executed from the command line, and it has to print
> out the word "greeting".
>
>
> Where can I enter the project name "Hello World". Is the
> "configuration" used for that?
>
> Best regards, - Hans
>
>
> Aitor Bediaga wrote:
>> As far as I know, there is people now working on the process
>> enactment or process instantiation. I'm researching about process
>> enactment mechanisms for EPF and I have concluded that there are at
>> least twoe alternatives:
>>
>> 1. Modify or extend the SPEM/UMA metamodel, adding
>> "concrete"/"instances" of elements to the metamodel (Activity -->
>> ConcreteActivity or TaskKind --> Task).
>>
>> 2. Instead of extending SPEM you can specify another metamodel which
>> allows you representing an instance of a process model. A
>> instantiation of a process requires user interaction so be carefull,
>> it isn't an automatic task...
>>
>> About process execution, I think that it would be very usefull a
>> transformation between a process instantiation and a BPEL process
>> (business process) or XPDL process (Workflow).
>>
>> What is you opinion?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Aitor Bediaga
>> Engineer
>> European Software Institute (www.esi.es)
>> aitor[_dot_]bediaga[_@_]esi[_dot_]es
>>
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat May 10 16:10:37 EDT 2025
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.04322 seconds |
Home