|
| Re: Use of Facets [message #14642 is a reply to message #14611] |
Thu, 05 February 2009 15:11   |
 Eric Dillon
Messages: 103
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Marc,
Agreed, the scope definition (ie. Figuring out that the default package name
can be edited is far from obvious. Some usability improvement much needed
there).
What you are describing below though is different from the intent of a
facet. The facet is intended to be a "valid self-contained submodel", which
means we will include the extended artifacts no matter what, unless you
explicitly exclude everything manually (by listing them in the exclude
clause).
It seems you're more interested in a filtering mechanism. We currently have
no plan to do that. Could you maybe provide a bit context as what you're
trying to accomplish?
Eric
On 2/5/09 1:29 PM, in article
3fb65bf9b6c7f3ad1373aff85a5a3a1c$1@www.eclipse.org, "Marc FLAUW"
<marc.flauw@hp.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I tried to define a facet for my project.
>
> Context:
> - I imported the SID model in Tigerstripe with the SID Import plugin
> - Now I want to reduce the model to just the packages I need
> - The packages I need are:
> * Problem_ABE under Logical_View/Common_Business_Entities_Domain
> * Service_Problem_ABE under Logical/View/Service_Domain
>
> I create a SPM facet object in my project.
> Then I try to define the scope. when I click on the "Add" button of the
> Included patterns", the only thing that is proposed is the default
> artifact package I defined for my project: org.tmforum.interfaces. I
> discovered after a few trials that I can edit this string to specify the
> pattern I need: Logical_View/Common_Business_Entities_Domain/Porblem_ABE/*
>
> But the way to do that is not really evident.
>
> More serious problem: I want only to have the objects in the 2 packages
> above, not the objects, not the objects inherited, dependent, refereenced
> or associated.
> The current behaviour seems to include all of the above and the GUI for
> defining the scope does not allow show the various checkboxes that are
> defined in the doc pages.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marc
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Use of Facets [message #564444 is a reply to message #14611] |
Thu, 05 February 2009 15:11 |
Eric Dillon
Messages: 103
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Marc,
Agreed, the scope definition (ie. Figuring out that the default package name
can be edited is far from obvious. Some usability improvement much needed
there).
What you are describing below though is different from the intent of a
facet. The facet is intended to be a "valid self-contained submodel", which
means we will include the extended artifacts no matter what, unless you
explicitly exclude everything manually (by listing them in the exclude
clause).
It seems you're more interested in a filtering mechanism. We currently have
no plan to do that. Could you maybe provide a bit context as what you're
trying to accomplish?
Eric
On 2/5/09 1:29 PM, in article
3fb65bf9b6c7f3ad1373aff85a5a3a1c$1@www.eclipse.org, "Marc FLAUW"
<marc.flauw@hp.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I tried to define a facet for my project.
>
> Context:
> - I imported the SID model in Tigerstripe with the SID Import plugin
> - Now I want to reduce the model to just the packages I need
> - The packages I need are:
> * Problem_ABE under Logical_View/Common_Business_Entities_Domain
> * Service_Problem_ABE under Logical/View/Service_Domain
>
> I create a SPM facet object in my project.
> Then I try to define the scope. when I click on the "Add" button of the
> Included patterns", the only thing that is proposed is the default
> artifact package I defined for my project: org.tmforum.interfaces. I
> discovered after a few trials that I can edit this string to specify the
> pattern I need: Logical_View/Common_Business_Entities_Domain/Porblem_ABE/*
>
> But the way to do that is not really evident.
>
> More serious problem: I want only to have the objects in the 2 packages
> above, not the objects, not the objects inherited, dependent, refereenced
> or associated.
> The current behaviour seems to include all of the above and the GUI for
> defining the scope does not allow show the various checkboxes that are
> defined in the doc pages.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marc
>
>
|
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03242 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
