Skip to main content


Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Modeling » EMF "Technology" (Ecore Tools, EMFatic, etc)  » [MWE] MWE project evolution?(Question to now if the MWE continues to evolve and will switch as official EMF project)
[MWE] MWE project evolution? [message #505869] Tue, 05 January 2010 12:33 Go to next message
Sebastien Revol is currently offline Sebastien RevolFriend
Messages: 15
Registered: July 2009
Junior Member
Hi all,
I'm very interested by the approach proposed by MWE. It would permit us to easily deliver and reuse elementary generators/transformations in an industrial context (command line) without having to develop/test tons of java code for each new workflow (which is often longer to write than the transformation itself...).

However, before deploying tools in a production context relying on this solution, I'd like to be sure of the durability of this project.

For instance the roadmap presented in the wiki does not seem up to date (last mileston on 2008-08-01).

Is it planned that MWE continues to evolve and switch from incubation to official project?

Thanks in advance,
Best regards,

Sebastien Revol

Re: [MWE] MWE project evolution? [message #505876 is a reply to message #505869] Tue, 05 January 2010 12:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sven Efftinge is currently offline Sven EfftingeFriend
Messages: 1823
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi Sebastien,

MWE is used in Xpand and Xtext and we've just started to work on a new
syntax for the MWE configuration file (based on Xtext).
To answer your question: The project is active, used and maintained.

For Helios we of course fix any serious bugs and as said we plan to come
up with better tooling, Xtext based language infrastructure and a more
lightweight runtime.

Best regards,
Sven

Sebastien Revol schrieb:
> Hi all,
> I'm very interested by the approach proposed by MWE. It would permit us
> to easily deliver and reuse elementary generators/transformations in an
> industrial context (command line) without having to develop/test tons of
> java code for each new workflow (which is often longer to write than the
> transformation itself...).
> However, before deploying tools in a production context relying on this
> solution, I'd like to be sure of the durability of this project.
>
> For instance the roadmap presented in the wiki does not seem up to date
> (last mileston on 2008-08-01).
> Is it planned that MWE continues to evolve and switch from incubation to
> official project?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Best regards,
>
> Sebastien Revol
>


--
Need professional support for Xtext and EMF?
Go to: http://xtext.itemis.com
Twitter : @svenefftinge
Blog : blog.efftinge.de
Re: [MWE] MWE project evolution? [message #505884 is a reply to message #505876] Tue, 05 January 2010 13:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sebastien Revol is currently offline Sebastien RevolFriend
Messages: 15
Registered: July 2009
Junior Member
Hi Sven,
and thanks for these good news!

I was indeed afraid that the seperation of OAW into different projects could compromise some of its components.

Our goal is to rely on MWE not only for oaw elements such as xtext parsers, xtend transfos or xpand generators, but also to encapsulate and chain ATL transfos, or pure java code.

Even if I believe that MWE is the best solution for our needs, I still need to convince my managers, which are more sensible to investment/durability aspects. That's why I was looking for a kind of official roadmap.

Do you have an idea of what is needed for this project to switch from incubation to official Eclipse project?

Best regards,

Sebastien
Re: [MWE] MWE project evolution? [message #506096 is a reply to message #505876] Wed, 06 January 2010 06:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sven Krause is currently offline Sven KrauseFriend
Messages: 119
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi Sven,

what is planned there? We might have a proposal how to simplify workflow
usage and make it deployable.

In our flowr.org OS-project we've created a wrapper around the workflow
to allow declare variable to become workflow parameters and an extension
point to encapsulate bundles workflows to be deployed together with the
workflow components. So an simple workflow script looks like:

workflow "workflow-name" {
iterator {
fileset {
file extension matches "myExtension"
}

cartridge "org.flowr.gen.sample.EcoreGenerator" {
param "workspace.root" "${workspace.root}"
param "model" "${it.toUri()}"
param "genCommands" "GenModelCode,GenEditCode"
param "clean" "true"
}

cartridge "org.flowr.gen.sample.GmfGenerator" {
param "workspace.root" "${workspace.root}"
param "model" "${it.toUri()}"
param "genCommands" "GenModel,GenDiagram"
param "clean" "true"
}
}
}

Where the cartidges are registered via the extesion point and covers the
final workflows to be executed. These workflows are packages with the
workflow components able to execute the emf code generator and gmf code
generator in the example.

The workflow scripts creates on the fly the workflow invoking the
wrapped workflows:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<workflow>
<cartridge file="pluginpath.../EMFGen.oaw">
<workspace.root value="${workspace.root}" />
<model value="xxx.../xyz.genmodel" />
<genCommands value="GenModelCode,GenEditCode" />
<clean value="true" />
</cartridge>
<cartridge file="pluginpath.../GMFGen.oaw">
<model value="xxx.../xyz.genmodel" />
<clean value="true" />
<genCommands value="GenModel,GenDiagram" />
</cartridge>
</workflow>

Sven

PS: these workflow script concept might become part of the MFT project -
that is right now in proposal phase (http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/mtf/).

Sven Efftinge schrieb:
> Hi Sebastien,
>
> MWE is used in Xpand and Xtext and we've just started to work on a new
> syntax for the MWE configuration file (based on Xtext).
> To answer your question: The project is active, used and maintained.
>
> For Helios we of course fix any serious bugs and as said we plan to come
> up with better tooling, Xtext based language infrastructure and a more
> lightweight runtime.
>
> Best regards,
> Sven
>
> Sebastien Revol schrieb:
>> Hi all,
>> I'm very interested by the approach proposed by MWE. It would permit
>> us to easily deliver and reuse elementary generators/transformations
>> in an industrial context (command line) without having to develop/test
>> tons of java code for each new workflow (which is often longer to
>> write than the transformation itself...).
>> However, before deploying tools in a production context relying on
>> this solution, I'd like to be sure of the durability of this project.
>>
>> For instance the roadmap presented in the wiki does not seem up to
>> date (last mileston on 2008-08-01).
>> Is it planned that MWE continues to evolve and switch from incubation
>> to official project?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Sebastien Revol
>>
>
>
Re: [MWE] MWE project evolution? [message #506907 is a reply to message #506096] Mon, 11 January 2010 10:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sven Efftinge is currently offline Sven EfftingeFriend
Messages: 1823
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi Sven,

Sebastian promised to post a blog showing the new editor in action this
week.

I'm not sure I understood what your solution is about...
Could you please line out a concrete use case?

Cheers,
Sven

Sven Krause schrieb:
> Hi Sven,
>
> what is planned there? We might have a proposal how to simplify workflow
> usage and make it deployable.
>
> In our flowr.org OS-project we've created a wrapper around the workflow
> to allow declare variable to become workflow parameters and an extension
> point to encapsulate bundles workflows to be deployed together with the
> workflow components. So an simple workflow script looks like:
>
> workflow "workflow-name" {
> iterator {
> fileset {
> file extension matches "myExtension"
> }
>
> cartridge "org.flowr.gen.sample.EcoreGenerator" {
> param "workspace.root" "${workspace.root}"
> param "model" "${it.toUri()}"
> param "genCommands" "GenModelCode,GenEditCode"
> param "clean" "true"
> }
>
> cartridge "org.flowr.gen.sample.GmfGenerator" {
> param "workspace.root" "${workspace.root}"
> param "model" "${it.toUri()}"
> param "genCommands" "GenModel,GenDiagram"
> param "clean" "true"
> }
> }
> }
>
> Where the cartidges are registered via the extesion point and covers the
> final workflows to be executed. These workflows are packages with the
> workflow components able to execute the emf code generator and gmf code
> generator in the example.
>
> The workflow scripts creates on the fly the workflow invoking the
> wrapped workflows:
>
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <workflow>
> <cartridge file="pluginpath.../EMFGen.oaw">
> <workspace.root value="${workspace.root}" />
> <model value="xxx.../xyz.genmodel" />
> <genCommands value="GenModelCode,GenEditCode" />
> <clean value="true" />
> </cartridge>
> <cartridge file="pluginpath.../GMFGen.oaw">
> <model value="xxx.../xyz.genmodel" />
> <clean value="true" />
> <genCommands value="GenModel,GenDiagram" />
> </cartridge>
> </workflow>
>
> Sven
>
> PS: these workflow script concept might become part of the MFT project -
> that is right now in proposal phase
> (http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/mtf/).
>
> Sven Efftinge schrieb:
>> Hi Sebastien,
>>
>> MWE is used in Xpand and Xtext and we've just started to work on a new
>> syntax for the MWE configuration file (based on Xtext).
>> To answer your question: The project is active, used and maintained.
>>
>> For Helios we of course fix any serious bugs and as said we plan to
>> come up with better tooling, Xtext based language infrastructure and a
>> more lightweight runtime.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Sven
>>
>> Sebastien Revol schrieb:
>>> Hi all,
>>> I'm very interested by the approach proposed by MWE. It would permit
>>> us to easily deliver and reuse elementary generators/transformations
>>> in an industrial context (command line) without having to
>>> develop/test tons of java code for each new workflow (which is often
>>> longer to write than the transformation itself...).
>>> However, before deploying tools in a production context relying on
>>> this solution, I'd like to be sure of the durability of this project.
>>>
>>> For instance the roadmap presented in the wiki does not seem up to
>>> date (last mileston on 2008-08-01).
>>> Is it planned that MWE continues to evolve and switch from incubation
>>> to official project?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Sebastien Revol
>>>
>>
>>


--
Need professional support for Xtext and EMF?
Go to: http://xtext.itemis.com
Twitter : @svenefftinge
Blog : blog.efftinge.de
Re: [MWE] MWE project evolution? [message #507293 is a reply to message #505876] Tue, 12 January 2010 18:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sven Efftinge is currently offline Sven EfftingeFriend
Messages: 1823
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Here's the mentioned blog post :
http://zarnekow.blogspot.com/2010/01/sneak-peek-at-new-mwe-e ditor.html

Sven

Sven Efftinge schrieb:
> Hi Sebastien,
>
> MWE is used in Xpand and Xtext and we've just started to work on a new
> syntax for the MWE configuration file (based on Xtext).
> To answer your question: The project is active, used and maintained.
>
> For Helios we of course fix any serious bugs and as said we plan to come
> up with better tooling, Xtext based language infrastructure and a more
> lightweight runtime.
>
> Best regards,
> Sven
>
> Sebastien Revol schrieb:
>> Hi all,
>> I'm very interested by the approach proposed by MWE. It would permit
>> us to easily deliver and reuse elementary generators/transformations
>> in an industrial context (command line) without having to develop/test
>> tons of java code for each new workflow (which is often longer to
>> write than the transformation itself...).
>> However, before deploying tools in a production context relying on
>> this solution, I'd like to be sure of the durability of this project.
>>
>> For instance the roadmap presented in the wiki does not seem up to
>> date (last mileston on 2008-08-01).
>> Is it planned that MWE continues to evolve and switch from incubation
>> to official project?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Sebastien Revol
>>
>
>


--
Need professional support for Xtext and EMF?
Go to: http://xtext.itemis.com
Twitter : @svenefftinge
Blog : blog.efftinge.de
Re: [MWE] MWE project evolution? [message #507720 is a reply to message #507293] Thu, 14 January 2010 13:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sven Krause is currently offline Sven KrauseFriend
Messages: 119
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi Sven, Sebastian,
using xtext makes the workflows much more readable. I really like this. It was one reason to start with the generator script feature I mentioned. The other was to hide the technical code gen details from the final user. This makes sense in my eyes, if you are creating MDE tool suites.

The request use case is very simple:
We have a system of various models that builds together a full description of a target system to generate. Each model corresponds to one of more workflows, which triggers the code gen and other things for the specific system unit the model describes - quasi software components at modeling level. The number of potential variants for such workflow combinations growth very fast, if the number of meta-models and/workflows increases.
So the genscripts allows iterating over a set of matching models executing the referenced workflows (covered by the cartridge). Available cartridges are registered via extension point ( http://flowr.org:8080/display/flowr/Step7+Create+a+generator +Cartridge).
The users "new script" dialog provides then a wizard, where the user may select the models to be generated and the system presents a set of pattern how to build the proper workflow generation. ( http://flowr.org:8080/display/flowr/Create+a+Generation+Scri pt)
The gen script is if you like a workflow for creating workflows on the fly based on user defined criteria.

Sven

[Updated on: Fri, 15 January 2010 05:53]

Report message to a moderator

Re: [MWE] MWE project evolution? [message #621961 is a reply to message #505876] Tue, 05 January 2010 13:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sebastien Revol is currently offline Sebastien RevolFriend
Messages: 15
Registered: July 2009
Junior Member
Hi Sven,
and thanks for these good news!

I was indeed afraid that the seperation of OAW into different projects could compromise some of its components.

Our goal is to rely on MWE not only for oaw elements such as xtext parsers, xtend transfos or xpand generators, but also to encapsulate and chain ATL transfos, or pure java code.

Even if I believe that MWE is the best solution for our needs, I still need to convince my managers, which are more sensible to investment/durability aspects. That's why I was looking for a kind of official roadmap.

Do you have an idea of what is needed for this project to switch from incubation to official Eclipse project?

Best regards,

Sebastien
Re: [MWE] MWE project evolution? [message #621962 is a reply to message #505876] Wed, 06 January 2010 06:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sven Krause is currently offline Sven KrauseFriend
Messages: 119
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi Sven,

what is planned there? We might have a proposal how to simplify workflow
usage and make it deployable.

In our flowr.org OS-project we've created a wrapper around the workflow
to allow declare variable to become workflow parameters and an extension
point to encapsulate bundles workflows to be deployed together with the
workflow components. So an simple workflow script looks like:

workflow "workflow-name" {
iterator {
fileset {
file extension matches "myExtension"
}

cartridge "org.flowr.gen.sample.EcoreGenerator" {
param "workspace.root" "${workspace.root}"
param "model" "${it.toUri()}"
param "genCommands" "GenModelCode,GenEditCode"
param "clean" "true"
}

cartridge "org.flowr.gen.sample.GmfGenerator" {
param "workspace.root" "${workspace.root}"
param "model" "${it.toUri()}"
param "genCommands" "GenModel,GenDiagram"
param "clean" "true"
}
}
}

Where the cartidges are registered via the extesion point and covers the
final workflows to be executed. These workflows are packages with the
workflow components able to execute the emf code generator and gmf code
generator in the example.

The workflow scripts creates on the fly the workflow invoking the
wrapped workflows:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<workflow>
<cartridge file="pluginpath.../EMFGen.oaw">
<workspace.root value="${workspace.root}" />
<model value="xxx.../xyz.genmodel" />
<genCommands value="GenModelCode,GenEditCode" />
<clean value="true" />
</cartridge>
<cartridge file="pluginpath.../GMFGen.oaw">
<model value="xxx.../xyz.genmodel" />
<clean value="true" />
<genCommands value="GenModel,GenDiagram" />
</cartridge>
</workflow>

Sven

PS: these workflow script concept might become part of the MFT project -
that is right now in proposal phase (http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/mtf/).

Sven Efftinge schrieb:
> Hi Sebastien,
>
> MWE is used in Xpand and Xtext and we've just started to work on a new
> syntax for the MWE configuration file (based on Xtext).
> To answer your question: The project is active, used and maintained.
>
> For Helios we of course fix any serious bugs and as said we plan to come
> up with better tooling, Xtext based language infrastructure and a more
> lightweight runtime.
>
> Best regards,
> Sven
>
> Sebastien Revol schrieb:
>> Hi all,
>> I'm very interested by the approach proposed by MWE. It would permit
>> us to easily deliver and reuse elementary generators/transformations
>> in an industrial context (command line) without having to develop/test
>> tons of java code for each new workflow (which is often longer to
>> write than the transformation itself...).
>> However, before deploying tools in a production context relying on
>> this solution, I'd like to be sure of the durability of this project.
>>
>> For instance the roadmap presented in the wiki does not seem up to
>> date (last mileston on 2008-08-01).
>> Is it planned that MWE continues to evolve and switch from incubation
>> to official project?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Sebastien Revol
>>
>
>
Re: [MWE] MWE project evolution? [message #621981 is a reply to message #506096] Mon, 11 January 2010 10:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sven Efftinge is currently offline Sven EfftingeFriend
Messages: 1823
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi Sven,

Sebastian promised to post a blog showing the new editor in action this
week.

I'm not sure I understood what your solution is about...
Could you please line out a concrete use case?

Cheers,
Sven

Sven Krause schrieb:
> Hi Sven,
>
> what is planned there? We might have a proposal how to simplify workflow
> usage and make it deployable.
>
> In our flowr.org OS-project we've created a wrapper around the workflow
> to allow declare variable to become workflow parameters and an extension
> point to encapsulate bundles workflows to be deployed together with the
> workflow components. So an simple workflow script looks like:
>
> workflow "workflow-name" {
> iterator {
> fileset {
> file extension matches "myExtension"
> }
>
> cartridge "org.flowr.gen.sample.EcoreGenerator" {
> param "workspace.root" "${workspace.root}"
> param "model" "${it.toUri()}"
> param "genCommands" "GenModelCode,GenEditCode"
> param "clean" "true"
> }
>
> cartridge "org.flowr.gen.sample.GmfGenerator" {
> param "workspace.root" "${workspace.root}"
> param "model" "${it.toUri()}"
> param "genCommands" "GenModel,GenDiagram"
> param "clean" "true"
> }
> }
> }
>
> Where the cartidges are registered via the extesion point and covers the
> final workflows to be executed. These workflows are packages with the
> workflow components able to execute the emf code generator and gmf code
> generator in the example.
>
> The workflow scripts creates on the fly the workflow invoking the
> wrapped workflows:
>
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <workflow>
> <cartridge file="pluginpath.../EMFGen.oaw">
> <workspace.root value="${workspace.root}" />
> <model value="xxx.../xyz.genmodel" />
> <genCommands value="GenModelCode,GenEditCode" />
> <clean value="true" />
> </cartridge>
> <cartridge file="pluginpath.../GMFGen.oaw">
> <model value="xxx.../xyz.genmodel" />
> <clean value="true" />
> <genCommands value="GenModel,GenDiagram" />
> </cartridge>
> </workflow>
>
> Sven
>
> PS: these workflow script concept might become part of the MFT project -
> that is right now in proposal phase
> (http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/mtf/).
>
> Sven Efftinge schrieb:
>> Hi Sebastien,
>>
>> MWE is used in Xpand and Xtext and we've just started to work on a new
>> syntax for the MWE configuration file (based on Xtext).
>> To answer your question: The project is active, used and maintained.
>>
>> For Helios we of course fix any serious bugs and as said we plan to
>> come up with better tooling, Xtext based language infrastructure and a
>> more lightweight runtime.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Sven
>>
>> Sebastien Revol schrieb:
>>> Hi all,
>>> I'm very interested by the approach proposed by MWE. It would permit
>>> us to easily deliver and reuse elementary generators/transformations
>>> in an industrial context (command line) without having to
>>> develop/test tons of java code for each new workflow (which is often
>>> longer to write than the transformation itself...).
>>> However, before deploying tools in a production context relying on
>>> this solution, I'd like to be sure of the durability of this project.
>>>
>>> For instance the roadmap presented in the wiki does not seem up to
>>> date (last mileston on 2008-08-01).
>>> Is it planned that MWE continues to evolve and switch from incubation
>>> to official project?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Sebastien Revol
>>>
>>
>>


--
Need professional support for Xtext and EMF?
Go to: http://xtext.itemis.com
Twitter : @svenefftinge
Blog : blog.efftinge.de
Re: [MWE] MWE project evolution? [message #621989 is a reply to message #505876] Tue, 12 January 2010 18:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sven Efftinge is currently offline Sven EfftingeFriend
Messages: 1823
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Here's the mentioned blog post :
http://zarnekow.blogspot.com/2010/01/sneak-peek-at-new-mwe-e ditor.html

Sven

Sven Efftinge schrieb:
> Hi Sebastien,
>
> MWE is used in Xpand and Xtext and we've just started to work on a new
> syntax for the MWE configuration file (based on Xtext).
> To answer your question: The project is active, used and maintained.
>
> For Helios we of course fix any serious bugs and as said we plan to come
> up with better tooling, Xtext based language infrastructure and a more
> lightweight runtime.
>
> Best regards,
> Sven
>
> Sebastien Revol schrieb:
>> Hi all,
>> I'm very interested by the approach proposed by MWE. It would permit
>> us to easily deliver and reuse elementary generators/transformations
>> in an industrial context (command line) without having to develop/test
>> tons of java code for each new workflow (which is often longer to
>> write than the transformation itself...).
>> However, before deploying tools in a production context relying on
>> this solution, I'd like to be sure of the durability of this project.
>>
>> For instance the roadmap presented in the wiki does not seem up to
>> date (last mileston on 2008-08-01).
>> Is it planned that MWE continues to evolve and switch from incubation
>> to official project?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Sebastien Revol
>>
>
>


--
Need professional support for Xtext and EMF?
Go to: http://xtext.itemis.com
Twitter : @svenefftinge
Blog : blog.efftinge.de
Re: [MWE] MWE project evolution? [message #621997 is a reply to message #507293] Thu, 14 January 2010 13:27 Go to previous message
Sven Krause is currently offline Sven KrauseFriend
Messages: 119
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi Sven, Sebastian,
using xtext makes the workflows much more readable. I like really this. It was one reason to start with the generator script feature I mentioned. The other was to hide the technical code gen details from the final user. This makes sense in my eyes, if you are creating MDE tool suites.

The request use case is very simple:
We have a system of various models that builds together a full description of a target system to generate. Each model corresponds to one of more workflows, which triggers the code gen and other things for the specific system unit the model describes - quasi software components at modeling level. The number of potential variants for such workflow combinations growth very fast, if the number of meta-models and/workflows increases.
So the genscripts allows iterating over a set of matching models executing the referenced workflows (covered by the cartridge). Available cartridges are registered via extension point ( http://flowr.org:8080/display/flowr/Step7+Create+a+generator +Cartridge).
The users "new script" dialog provides then a wizard, where the user may select the models to be generated and the system presents a set of pattern how to build the proper workflow generation. ( http://flowr.org:8080/display/flowr/Create+a+Generation+Scri pt)
The gen script is if you like a workflow for creating workflows on the fly based on user defined criteria.

Sven
Previous Topic:CDO exception
Next Topic:[EMF Compare] "Copy current change from right to left" doesn't work?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Jun 22 02:53:08 GMT 2021

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02576 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

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

Back to the top