|Re: [gmt-dev] The four compoents (was Initial CVS structure)|
You're making the assumption that UMLX as-is forms the base of GMT. The list of features of GMT as per project description is much larger than what you currently have in UMLX - as far as I can see - and the list of envisaged GMT features will rather grow than shrink over time. At the highest level it makes sense to distinguish the components of GMT as:
Hence the directory high-level structure. From the package/directory structure you suggest, it is evident that your anticipated usage of GMT is quite different from Ghica's and mine. We certainly don't see any "java" or "sql" package at the core of GMT. The mapping to java for example will be dependent on the specific target environment (local application architecture standards, implementation technology standards, legacy context, etc.), and should be captured in a PDM and the texture mapping between PIM and PDM. Similarly the SQL DDL that needs to be generated depends on local O/R mapping standards/strategies, the chosen persistence framework etc. and needs to be defined in the form of PDM and texture mappings.
In order for us to better understand the scope and usefulness of UMLX, please post your code base at org.eclipe.gmt.umlx.... then we can hopefully start a meaningful discussion. Meanwhile I'd like to suggest that the standard implementation language should be JAVA, and XML technologies. Any other technologies such as C or C++ should only be used if absolutely necessary, such as for the integration of GME which does not yet have a Java interface.
The next step in our project is the prioritisation of features as per project ground rules. The result of the prioritisation will provide context for discussing the architecture, allowing us to focus on the important items.
Back to the top