Thanks.
Today I improved the editor a bit and deleted the old plugins. These
changes are committed.
Locally I prepared (hopefully) the last big change that I will
commit tomorrow: I will rename the new plugins back from “bpmn2” to “bpmn”.
If this is through, I can concentrate on the more interesting topics,
e.g. ensure that “resolveProxies” is always turned off, and implement multi-file
support.
Regards,
Reiner.
Von:
antoine.toulme@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:antoine.toulme@xxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Antoine
Toulme
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 8. Juli 2010 01:42
An: Hille-Doering, Reiner
Cc: BPMN2 Developers Mailing List
Betreff: Re: [mdt-bpmn2.dev] Some questions
I aligned the build to work with your new plugins. At this
point, removing the old ones is possible. I refrain from doing it as I'd like
to be sure you have everything in check.
Antoine
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 09:05, Hille-Doering, Reiner <reiner.hille-doering@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
Thanks Antoine.
Tomorrow I will start
integrating the new version into the old one. Please let me know if I should
consider something.
Reiner.
That
was my intention. I needed that change to start working with the metamodel. I'm
ready to make the switch to the new metamodel.
I'll
probably make the switch today.
On
Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 03:42, Hille-Doering, Reiner <reiner.hille-doering@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi Antoine,
I have commited the initial approved
contribution in org.eclipse.bpmn2.ecore .
I have seen that you also committed (http://git.eclipse.org/c/bpmn2/commit/?id=e5c3e2a7f4690f869e16f19abb0ed1ac240ee5b3)
a change in the “old” “org.eclipse.bpmn” project.
What should I do with the change? If I now go on and integrate the new
“org.eclipse.bpmn2” projects into “org.eclipse.bpmn”, I will anyway overwrite
your changes.
However, I could also change my .genmodel accordingly to “suppress
EMF types”.
Was this you intention?
Thanks and regards,
Reiner.
You can
commit part of the initial contribution (ie only the models) first, then
proceed. Sorry for the late response.
On
Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 10:43, Hille-Doering, Reiner <reiner.hille-doering@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
Thanks Antoine.
Could you please give me some
hints how to proceed?
I mean:
a)
Should I commit
the initial contribution somehow, and maybe delete later?
b)
Or should I proceed
now integrating the code in the new “bpmn2” plugins into the old “bpmn”
plugins.
Reiner.
We're
good, no worries.
On
Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 04:09, Hille-Doering, Reiner <reiner.hille-doering@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
Unfortunately or fortunately
(depending on the perspective) the GIT push of my current version went through,
so you find my current version on http://git.eclipse.org/c/bpmn2/ . Please try it and give
feedback.
Unfortunately this was step 2
of the plan below, so 1. is still missing. Do you think it is required to
delete stuff from step 2., then checkin the original constribution, delete it
and recreate the newer version?
Or any other idea how to
proceed and be compliant to IP rules?
Thanks,
Reiner.
Von:
Hille-Doering, Reiner
Gesendet: Freitag, 2. Juli 2010 10:08
An: 'antoine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx';
BPMN2 Developers Mailing List
Betreff: AW: [mdt-bpmn2.dev] Some questions
Thanks Antoine and Henning.
Then what do you think about
the following „action plan“.
1.
I wait for GIT
permissions.
2.
I “push” in the
original contribution to be IP process compliant.
3.
I “push” in the
current version I have now – in parallel delete result from 2.
· New plugins with
org.eclipse.bpmn2* name
· BPMNDI now as option 1. In
Bugzilla discussion, i.e. package is “org.eclipse.bpmn.di” and NS prefix is
“bpmndi”
· Move DI and DC packages to
“org.eclipse.dd” package.
· All icons correctly
integrated
4.
Last “push” will
delete the content of the “old” “org.eclipse.bpmn” and move the stuff from step
3 in.
This plan also gives enough
time for you to have a look on both version in parallel.
Reiner.
See my
comments on Henning comments :)
On
Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 01:42, Henning Heitkötter <hheitkoetter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hello
Reiner,
again, welcome! See my responses inline.
2010/6/30
Hille-Doering, Reiner <reiner.hille-doering@xxxxxxx>
thanks for promoting me to a committer for MDT BPMN2
project.
I will start commiting my code as soon as possible,
but I still have some questions:
- In
“org.eclipse.bpmn2” I see 4 plugins that I would replace with my version:
“org.eclipse.mdt.bpmn”, “org.eclipse.mdt.bpmn.edit”, and
“org.eclipse.mdt.bpmn.editor”. Would it be Ok to delete the current
content and put in my stuff? Or should I better start with new plugins
having new names?
You
need to keep the plugin folders and ids. Otherwise it's fine to redo the
work.
- What is the correct
naming: “org.eclipse.bpmn” or “org.eclipse.mdt.bpmn”? In the checked-in
version is seems to be not 100% clear, as classes for “semantic” are
checked in in package/path “org.eclipse.bpmn.*” and stuff from DI is in
“org.eclipse.mdt.bpmn.*”. Also the current .genmodel seems to be not
really consistent.
I
believe you are referring to the content from the CVS repository? We changed to
Git some time ago, apparently the project summary page was not updated - sorry
for that. Thus, the CVS repo does not contain the current version. You can take
a look at the git repository and clone urls at http://git.eclipse.org/c/bpmn2/
The current version uses only org.eclipse.bpmn as package.
Yes.
Note I didn't name it org.eclipse.bpmn2. I don't want to be in flux next time
we release 2.1.
3. The BPMN project’s Wiki page mentions package name
“org.eclipse.bpmn2”. Is this somehow also relevant?
I hadn't noticed that so far, but I'd prefer bpmn2 as well.
The
wiki page was written in 2007. We moved on since.
IMO,
we could start from scratch as you mentioned under (1) and reintegrate some
stuff from the current version, namely the SVG icons and the modified templates
(see below).
4. In my contributed version I had so far package name
“org.eclipse.bpmn2.ecore.BPMN20”. The uppercase “BPMN20” is not nice, but
it comes from original CMOF package name, and I felt not very confident if I
should really change it in the “BPMN20.ecore” file. Does anybody know a way to
change the package name in generated files using the .genmodel file only? (Same
is of cause also true for DI, DC, BPMNDI,…)
Yes,
in the properties of the .genmodel file for each top level element, you can
change the package name.
5. Is there a central build available, or ideally also
an update side that contains the result of the compiled project?
Yes,
still figuring out signing. This is mostly an experiment, we might be aligned
with the modeling project and use Buckminster before long.
6.
The current project contains many JET templates for the EMF code generator.
@Antoine: Could you explain for what they are needed? Do we need them also in
the new version?
One can override the default EMF code generation by supplying own templates
(see templates&merge section in genmodel). At the moment, only
edit/ItemProvider.javajet is modified (png instead of gif icon), the rest is
unmodified from the original EMF templates (from org.eclipse.emf.codegen.ecore)
and could be deleted (with the exception of FactoryClass.javajet due to bug
317549).
Indeed.
I kept the unmodified stuff around to keep on tinker with it.
So far my comments, Antoine should be able to give some more information.
Regards,
Henning
_______________________________________________
mdt-bpmn2.dev mailing list
mdt-bpmn2.dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/mdt-bpmn2.dev
|