Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [modeling-pmc] feedback on GMT web site

Title: Re: [modeling-pmc] feedback on GMT web site
Thanks for the ATL observation, Ian.  I was under the impression that our “identity crisis” components were all within GMT.  ATL has graduated from GMT recently, as have several components of oAW, but I see they still have a reference to the ATLAS Group on their page.  This should be removed, along with other references such as the Acknowledgement section at the bottom of this page:  Of course, the logos are not what you mean, right?  We have lots of logos in use within Modeling.

Until such time there is a policy for advertising external entities (commercial, academic, or otherwise) on the website, I agree that all references should be removed.  As Ed mentioned, you won’t find links to IBM or Borland on the EMF or GMF sites.

Regarding oAW, we have had discussions with them and decided the most painless approach was to require they strip their oAW identity when graduating to other modeling projects, also as Ed mentioned. The Xpand and Workflow components are undergoing a namespace refactoring as they migrate, and we’ll make sure there are no oAW on the M2T and EMFT websites.  We’ll certainly try to speed up this process.

Another timely topic is the recent announcement of the oAW 4.2 release (  and  I don’t recall a release review taking place for this component (or ever for GMT), and I see they are still providing links to download from on their download page.  Hopefully, we can correct this ASAP.


On 10/19/07 1:12 PM, "Ian Skerrett" <ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

What I would suggest is that the components of GMT should not have a logo/graphic and have a descriptive name not a nickname.  I think this would go a long way to improving the situation.   Btw, this goes for all the modeling sub-projects, for instance    Having all these different logos in my opinion conveys a perception that there is no strategy or integration between the components or the projects.
My 2 cents….

From: jbezivin@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:jbezivin@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jean Bezivin
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:48 PM
To: PMC members mailing list
Cc: ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx; Bjorn Freeman-Benson; modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [modeling-pmc] feedback on GMT web site

I agree with you.

I also agree that we have to improve much the organization of GMT.

For oAW matters, I will transmit these remarks to Markus Voelter.

I will discuss with him directly next week at OOPSLA because

he will be there.

Bjorn, will you be at OOPSLA and if yes would it be possible

to have a short meeting with Markus to stress the importance

of what has been said?

Best regards,



On 10/19/07, Ed Merks <merks@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'll draw Nick's attention to that link gone astray...

I agree with you.  As the various parts of the oAW technology are
incorporated into the other projects, like Xpand into M2T and MWE into
EMFT, I'll ask folks to avoid any non-Eclipse branding on the site.  You
won't find IBM/Rational branding nor Borland branding at Eclipse, so we
ought not be to seeing anything that isn't part of Eclipse's branding.
We'll queue up this topic for discussion at the next PMC meeting.

It would be good to improve GMT's image as well.  What are your thoughts on
this Jean?

Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
905-413-3265  (t/l 969)

            "Ian Skerrett"
            < ian.skerrett@ecl
   <> >                                                  To
            Sent by:                  <modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx  <mailto:modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx> >
            modeling-pmc-boun                                          cc
            ces@xxxxxxxxxxx          "'Bjorn Freeman-Benson'"
                                      < bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
            10/19/2007 12:06          [modeling-pmc] feedback on GMT web
            PM                        site

            Please respond to
    <> ; Please
              respond to
              PMC members
              mailing list
       <> >

Modeling PMC,

Today, I was looking at the open Achitectureware project and in general the
GMT project.   I don?t usually provide feedback on project specific
branding and marketing but I thought compelled to do so in this case.

IMHO, from a branding and marketing perspective, the open Architectureware
project looks out of place in the context of the Eclipse community.  They
essentially look like they have parachuted in their existing project into
an Eclipse project web page.  They actually also seem to have another
project web site  I find it all very
confusing and probably detrimental to the Eclipse brand.

If I look at the GMT site, it seems like the open architectureware scenario
plays out again and again.   I see lots of project logos and cool names
that seem to have very little to do with Eclipse?  The perception I am left
with is that GMT is hovering up existing modeling projects but not really
integrating them into Eclipse?  I think what you are doing is creating an
incubator for new modeling projects, which is great, but in my opinion what
you are communicating is something very different and will hurt the
perception of the overall modeling project.

As I said, I usually don?t provide this type of feedback but in this case I
just had to say something.   I?d be happy to discuss further and if you

Btw, when I went to try to find the PMC mailing list, the link on this page points to


Ian Skerrett
Director of Marketing
Eclipse Foundation
613-224-9461 ext. 227
blog:  <>
modeling-pmc mailing list

modeling-pmc mailing list

Richard C. Gronback
Borland Software Corporation
+1 860 227 9215

Back to the top