|Re: Best practices: versioning .ecore files [message #656746 is a reply to message #655739]
||Mon, 28 February 2011 12:06
| Maximilian Koegel
Registered: July 2009
EMFStore is capable of versioning and storing any EMF-based Model
including Ecore itself. However from a user perspective we believe an
integration with your (source code) team provider such as SVN or Git
would be very beneficial.
With the current state of EMFStore you can import a model into the
EMFStore and use its versioning and merging capabilities. EMFStore
supports interactive merging of EMF-based models, so you will only need
to resolve conflicting changes to merge. If you want to generate code
you can export to an .ecore file again.
We are currently working on an integration of EMFStore with SVN and GIT.
(see this blog post:
This will integrate the EMFStore-hosted Ecore models as files into your
project/package explorer. Also an update/commit on your project will
also trigger an update/commit on the EMFStore-hosted ecore file. We hope
to release a beta version for the EclipseCon.
If you would like to test an alpha, please let me know!
Am 22.02.2011 15:31, schrieb Christian Huelsmeier:
> in our project we're working with an .ecore file we generate code from
> (Xpand-based generator with ecore.ecore as metamodel).
> In the beginning of the project there was only one developer working
> with the model and the .ecore file was put to the projects SVN repository.
> Now there are a couple of developers working concurrently on that model
> and it's getting harder to cope with concurrent model changes since SVN
> only works with xml comparision.
> Are there any best practices for versioning of and concurrently working
> with .ecore files?
> I took a look at EMFStore and I think that it looks pretty cool, but as
> far as I can see it's for working with models based on my model (defined
> in .ecore file).
> I also took a look at CDO, but it seems to me that it's designed for
> similar use cases like covered by EMFStore.
> Is there "something on top of SVN", so that we're able to still store
> the file in SVN, but get merge support in a more convenient was?
Powered by FUDForum
. Page generated in 0.02419 seconds