Mainframe UML - Where Is It?

[Geert Bellekens]

You can add you own programming language and the define the primitive types for you programming language.
In COBOL that's like 'X' and '9' no?

Geert

PS. Pff... I must admit I'm glad not having to deal with COBOL for the moment

[RoyC]

Not exactly, Dana. You can create code modules for languages that are not supported by EA, and bring them into use through an MDG Technology. This is not something you would be able to do yourself at the moment - you need more experience with EA. However, with your COBOL knowledge and a sympathetic UML/EA expert (such as have popped up all around you here on the forum!) you might be able to work something out. I can't tell, but the experts would soon advise you.

Are your UML people EA experts? If not, maybe you could persuade qwerty to take a holiday down your way... unless a rival guru locks him in a cupboard and jumps on the 'plane first! (But not Geert, it seems.)

[Geert Bellekens]

I think the biggest challenge is not customizing EA, but defining your modelling method.
How are you going to structure your model, what UML element are you going to use for which type of Cobol/Mainframe artifacts.
Which information/disciplines do you need in your UML model.
Business Processes? Functional use cases? Requirements? and so on...

So you'll have to start by defining you modelling/analysis method and start building a meta model for it.

All of this work is (more or less) independent of the UML tool you use.
Only after you know your requirements (modelling method) you should start thinking about the solution (EA).

Geert

[Graham_Moir]

I agree Geert, but at least qwerty has provided some suggestions regarding how the model should be structured - often this is the hardest piece, looking at a blank piece of paper or screen.  

Then of course there's the learning curve of a tool like EA, at least following qwerty's suggestions Dana can make a start, get some value out of it and then perhaps revisit customisation later.  As Roy said MDG technologies are not for now in her situation.  

[RoyC]

Sage advice from all quarters. I probably tried to cover too many ideas in a short spurt, but as Geert implies, you need to go back to the first couple of posts in this thread and ask "What are we talking about here?" and, as Dana said and qwerty laid out "What kind of outline and cross-vocabulary can we develop?" Then, a long way down the track, you can ask "Can I tailor all this to better model these mainframe COBOL applications?" and know that there are ways to do that.

Maybe Dana should book qwerty in for a VERY long holiday!

[Dana Rothrock BCBSA]

I've got 6 weeks to model a highly complicated mainframe application in EA.
 [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

[RoyC]

Perhaps you should show this thread to your UML gurus and get them moving fast!

@qwerty - the BCBSA headquarters are in Illinois. Springtime on the Great Lakes - yes? No?

[Dana Rothrock BCBSA]

RoyC:

Perhaps you should show this thread to your UML gurus and get them moving fast!

I have to teach them mainframe, and they have to teach me OOD.  That's two lifetimes.
EA has to work for the average mainframe COBOL programmer.  We will establish standards, profiles or templates, etc.  Our Agile methodology suggests access and collaboration by all parties throughout the SDLC.  Maintenance of models will be a community responsibility depending upon project involvement.

@qwerty - the BCBSA headquarters are in Illinois. Springtime on the Great Lakes - yes? No?

Yes, BCBSA is on Michigan Ave, but no, I am remote in Florida where it has been Spring for 6 or 7 months.   [smiley=cool.gif]