I know that Papyrus is different from GMF and from UML2Tools.
The GMF Papyrus generator are an extension of the GMF tool to simplify
the work for Papyrus developers. Those two plugins will be used only
by developers.
OAW is used because some templates from GMF have to be overriden and
those template are done with OAW.
More, it is necessary to keep the same folder hierarchy than the bundle
"org.eclipse.gmf.codegen" to override existing templates.
Besides, to take into account the new templates defined, it is necessary
to defined the property "Template Directory" with the parent folder
containing all specific templates.
I don't know how to indicate more than one "Template Directory"
Additionnally, I don't think that it will change anything for the
developpers to have an unique plugin well structured (templates are
organized with folders int this plugin) instead of several plugins
with few templates in each one...
That's some of the reasons why I think it will be difficult to divide
into several plugins the generators...
For Properties, I know that generators exist. But as far as I know
(because I have never seen them, they are not present on the CEA svn),
they are realized with Acceleo and not OAW.
Regards,
Thibault
GERARD Sebastien 166342 a écrit :
I second the comment of Cedric. It is clear that Papyrus is different
from the UML2 MDT Tool, is clearly that Papyrus do not force the
usage of the GMF generator.
-----Message d'origine-----
De : mdt-papyrus.dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:mdt-papyrus.dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] De la part de Cedric
Dumoulin
Envoyé : mercredi 12 novembre 2008 16:04
À : thibault.landre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Papyrus Project list
Objet : Re: [mdt-papyrus.dev] Notes of the preccomitting meeting
Thibault LANDRE wrote:
Cédric,
I have named the plugin like they were denominated in the GMF and
UMLTools project (for the same functionnality).
I have kept this naming to avoid confusion for developers familiar
with GMF and UMLTools.
The idea was good, but we are not a GMF demonstrator :-). They have
named their plugins like that because they are gmf centric. This is
not our case.
GMF is just a tool that we use to produce diagrams. The artefact used
for the generation should not appear abruptly in the plugins. And for
me the names of the plugins should gives clear indication of their
purpose/contents. 'def' and 'codegen' are not meaningful for me. This
is why they should be renamed.
Also, we may have such def/codegen for properties, diagrams and
others. How we will do ? Mix all the stuff in the same 'def' plugin ?
I think it is a bad idea.
Cedric
_______________________________________________
mdt-papyrus.dev mailing list
mdt-papyrus.dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/mdt-papyrus.dev
_______________________________________________
mdt-papyrus.dev mailing list
mdt-papyrus.dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/mdt-papyrus.dev