Chaps - I'll be very happy to work
with you in the way described.|
Just beginning to get involved in TMF/OAW, I personally am probably not
entitled to a strong opinion on it's namespace/location - and indeed, I
don't have one - but it seems more likely to gain a community if it's
at least strongly associated with M2T, and easily discoverable by users
visiting OAW/Eclipse M2T.
To confirm - I'm happy to commit myself to helping maintain and
enhancing Recipe - where-ever it's hosted and whatever it's called. :)
Peter Friese wrote:
I think it is ok to have Recipe as a project of it's own
under M2T. We really should extract the code from M2T Xpand and make it
a separate project with a dedicated team of people taking care of it.
This way we can ensure it will be maintained.
Markus, as you have been involved with Recipe for a long time now, it
would be great if you could team up with Antony to create a project
proposal. I guess this way you will be able to gather some community
around Recipe, which is an important thing for a sustainable
development of a project.
Sent from my iPhone
On 10.07.2009, at 22:45, Markus Voelter <voelter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I agree that it needs a major overhaul. I suggest either a
textual DSL to specify "code constraints" or an integration
with Findbugs and the like. We've planned on doing that, but
we don't get around to it.
However, I *strongly* disagree regarding it not belonging to
M2T. Since the purpose of it is that is checks the conformity
of manually written code to generated code and models, M2T
clearly is the place for it.
Sven Efftinge wrote:
In addition I think it does not belong to
M2T, because it is not directly about model to text transformation.
So, if people think it is useful and want to support it I guess it's
best to find a new home.
On Jul 10, 2009, at 9:02 PM, Karsten Thoms wrote:
Regarding Recipe it is a bit unclear. The codebase is in Eclipse M2T
Xpand migrated, and Antony Wilkins is willing to contribute. So if this
component is maintained by someone nothing speaks against having it
further in oAW5. I hoped that it would be deprecated, since no one
seemed to use it and no one was willing to develop it further.
Am 10.07.2009 um 17:07 schrieb André Arnold:
are the Recipe framework and PLE really deprecated? Am I right, that we
deprecated UML classic and decided to not include PLE and
Recipe into oAW5 but might include it into oAW 5.5 or whatever we call
that view correct?
voelter - ingenieurbüro für softwaretechnologie/itemis
Ötztaler Strasse 38, 70327 Stuttgart-Untertürkheim, Germany
Tel. +49 (0) 171 / 86 01 869
SE Radio Podcast: http://www.se-radio.net
omega tau podcast: http://www.omegataupodcast.net
oaw-wg mailing list