Re: [mdt-ocl.dev] Evolving plugin/feature names

[Adolfo Sánchez-Barbudo Herrera <adolfosbh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Ed,

Today is quite easy to identify OCL Tools components, that is:

org.eclipse.ocl.examples.*

The problems come when identifying Core components, unless we consider Core everything is not o.e.o.examples.* (However, this doesn't help from the point of view of the regular expressions which are used, anyway).

From a releng (and any user) perspective it would be quite easy identify components if we had:

- org.eclipse.ocl.core.*  for Core components.
- org.eclipse.ocl.tools.* for Tools components.

This distinction could help, if we desired to have documentation, examples and tests for both Core and Tools components:

- org.eclipse.ocl.core.doc for Core API usage  documentation/help.
- org.eclipse.ocl.core.examples.* for Core API usage examples.
- org.eclipse.ocl.core.tests.* for Core API tests.
- org.eclipse.ocl.tools.doc for Tools documentation/help.
- org.eclipse.ocl.tools.examples.* for Tools examples.
- org.eclipse.ocl.tools.tests.* for (probably UI-based) tests.

This namespace could also help to identify the future components of the project. Everything not scoped in org.eclipse.ocl.core/tools should probably be deprecated and eventually deleted in future releases. I imagine something like the following:
 
org.eclipse.ocl                                       -> mature, deprecated code
org.eclipse.ocl.uml                               -> mature, deprecated code
org.eclipse.ocl.ecore                            -> mature, deprecated code
org.eclipse.ocl.ecore.impactanalysis[1]  -> impact analysis for the mature deprecated code
org.eclipse.ocl.core.pivot                          -> new pivot implementation
org.eclipse.ocl.core.essentialocl               -> new pivot-based Essential OCL Implementation
org.eclipse.ocl.core.completeocl              -> new pivot-based Complete OCL Implementation
org.eclipse.ocl.core.impactanalysis         -> impact analysis for the new pivot-based implementation
org.eclipse.ocl.core.doc                             -> documentation for the Core API usage
org.eclipse.ocl.core.examples.*                -> Examples for Core API usage.
org.eclipse.ocl.core.tests.*                        -> tests for Core API.
org.eclipse.ocl.tools.console                     -> OCL Console.
org.eclipse.ocl.tools.editor.essentialocl   -> Editor for Essential OCL
org.eclipse.ocl.tools.editor.completeocl  -> Editor for Complete OCL
org.eclipse.ocl.tools.doc                            -> documentation/help for Tools.
org.eclipse.ocl.tools.examples.*               -> examples for Tools.
org.eclipse.ocl.tools.tests.*                       -> (probably UI-based) tests for Tools.

... and such [2].

Again, this is a suggestion, which could make sense since we are now distinguising and exposing different Core and Tools components. It's not a necessity at all.

Adding a new/good features organization, we could finally distribute Core components in a pure Core Repository, and the Tools components in a pure Tools Repository. We could also distribute the current (deprecated and removed in the future) Core components in a "Deprecated Repository".

Nowadays, because of the current feature organization, the Core Repository contains only Core Components, however, the Tools repository contains both Core and Tools components.

Note: [1] Just to name the impact analyzer. This obviously could be organized as Axel requires/expects.
Note: [2] I know that I'm missing a lot of plugins, but I hope the idea is caught.

Best Regards,
Adolfo.

El 03/02/2012 14:18, Ed Willink escribió:

Hi Adolfo

Would you like to put together a proposal for revised feature and plugin names and hierarchy, since your releng perspective gives you slightly different interests? 4.0.0 is a major version so we can totally reorganize if absolutely necessary - I hope not.

From a modeling perspective, a Feature contain Features or Plugins so a simple indented list is sufficient to identify the intended location of all plugins and features and Update Site Names.

feature X (Descriptive Name for X)
   plugin Y
   feature Z (Descriptive Name for Z)
      plugin A

For the sake of future proofing, assign names as if all plugins are promoted from examples now; we'll just defer renaming examples plugins until they are actually promoted.

        Regards

            Ed

On 03/02/2012 13:58, Adolfo Sánchez-Barbudo Herrera wrote:

Finally, I would like to remark (I've not thought about it) the importance of the new namespace from the point of view of another stakeholder: The releng :). It could be interesting to avoid problems like [1] or further changes in the releng stuff configuration to accomodate new plugins, having a "coherent" or "uniform" namespace to distinguish Core components from the Tools one.

[1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=370347#c1

El 03/02/2012 12:03, Ed Willink escribió:

plugin and other global names
These obviously change. The simplest change is just delete ".examples". Do we want to do something else?
It would be nice if the event plugins went to EMF, but that doesn't look likely, so they too need review.
It would be nice to have names that can accommodate the pivot model sometime. I would like to try to partition the code into the run-time code that performs (re-)evaluation and the meta-run-time code that maintains the control objects that make IA so good. If this is possible, then we want corresponding names. Perhaps
  org.eclipse.ocl.ecore.impact.runtime
  org.eclipse.ocl.ecore.impact.analyzer
I hope that migration of the run-time code to align with the code generated Java can be done quite easily, since the code generated Java makes no use of any form of the OCL meta-model; just the polymorphic Values and polymorphic Domain model for which there is direct and Reflective Ecore support. Perhaps
  org.eclipse.ocl.domain.impact.runtime
Migration of the meta-run-time code will be harder because that obviously makes use of the OCL meta-model. Perhaps
  org.eclipse.ocl.pivot.impact.analyzer
In order to avoid code duplication, code that is independent of Ecore/UML/Pivot should be in perhaps
  org.eclipse.ocl.common.impact
It may also be appropriate to place some declarations independent of Ecore/UML/Pivot such as extension points in
  org.eclipse.ocl.common
We cannot easily use org.eclipse.ocl since that is highly Ecore/UML dependent.
NB being independent of Ecore does not prohibit use of EObject, EObject.eClass() etc. I hope that the external API facade can be Ecore/UML/Pivot independent and so in org.eclipse.ocl.common.impact.

_______________________________________________
mdt-ocl.dev mailing list
mdt-ocl.dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/mdt-ocl.dev

--

Adolfo Sánchez-Barbudo Herrera adolfosbh(at)opencanarias(dot)com C/Elías Ramos González, 4, ofc. 304 38001 SANTA CRUZ DE TENERIFE Tel.: +34 922 240231