Messages

1

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Rotate Diagram Objects

« on: August 14, 2007, 02:08:46 am »

Thanks, Bruce, but its not because its a complicated model that I want to rotate; it's for a display reason. Specifically, I have a boundary shape with vertical and horizontal swimlanes representing a business value to effort "graph" upon which I place components and I want the text on the vertical axis to be rotated along the direction of the axis.

2

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Rotate Diagram Objects

« on: August 13, 2007, 04:16:35 pm »

I would like this too. I am building a diagram where I would like to be able to rotate a text element, ie have text running vertically.

3

Suggestions and Requests / Saved Search on model/package

« on: August 19, 2007, 04:18:39 pm »

It would be nice to be able to specify a model or package as the "Search In" property for a saved search.  Currently the selection are entire model or current location only. I would like to have a hyperlink that runs a search knowing that the search is only searching within a given location so to be able to save the location with the search would be good.

4

Suggestions and Requests / Re: EA should use relative paths per default

« on: August 16, 2007, 02:57:51 pm »

(How come, this thread is on top without new post?)

There was a new post that brought it to the top - from me on Aug 15.

The icons are fine, that's not the issue.
The issue is the lack of a relative path mechanism on the file tab of element properties.

Mark.  

5

Suggestions and Requests / Re: EA should use relative paths per default

« on: August 15, 2007, 04:58:31 pm »

Local paths were added primarily to support different paths to the same source for people sharing a model on different machines.

It also works regardless of whether an eap file or repository is being used.

I am being faced with this problem at the moment and I donot see how the Settings/Local Paths facility helps. This is what I believe Simon has refering to but not what others were refering to by "Local Path". The Settings/Local Paths are only viable for generated source files and version control; you cannot use these defined Local Paths to specify a path to a file in the Files tab on an element property dialog - or can you? If so, how?

The question is - on the file tab of an elements property dialog how can you specify a path that is not absolute?

Mark.

6

General Board / Re: Generate Sequences without Triggers

« on: July 25, 2007, 06:44:43 pm »

I upgraded to Build 814 today. The problem remains however I received an email from Sparx to say that it would be fixed in Build 815.

7

General Board / Re: Generate Sequences without Triggers

« on: July 24, 2007, 03:16:07 am »

I reported it on 3 July 2007. During subsequent correspondence with Sparx I received the following comments...

10 July: "There will be a fix for these issues in build 814."
10 July: "813 has only just been released, so it could be 2 to 4 weeks away."

I am currently using Build 812.
I am targeting SQL Server 2005 and not Oracle (I have not tried generating DDL for Oracle as I have no need to).

Regards,
Mark.

8

General Board / Re: Generate Sequences without Triggers

« on: July 23, 2007, 07:08:11 pm »

I think this may be a problem introduced in EA7. I have previously been generating DDL for SQL Server tables that include an IDENTITY column. In version 7 that suddenly changed to the triggers as you described. I have reported it to Sparx and I think the next build will address it.

9

General Board / Re: RTF template - Adding Data to Header/Footer

« on: August 09, 2007, 07:43:39 pm »

I'd like to be able to do this as well.
Is it possible, anyone?

10

General Board / Re: Production/Development versions and change con

« on: October 08, 2007, 02:24:30 pm »

Thanks, Thomas. I'm not totally sold on that though. Correct me if I'm wrong but I read from your posts that you were surprised that it was again taking 2.5 mins to load, ie it had been fixed and is now broke again. If it is as Howard states then my connection to SVN is VERY slow - if I remove version control from the packages the model loads VERY quickly (from DBMS or EAP) but if I put some packages under VC it loads VERY slowly.

What/where is the log file refered to in your post - I'd like to check mine.
Are there any ways to "speed up SVN"?

11

General Board / Re: Production/Development versions and change con

« on: October 07, 2007, 04:24:57 pm »

Sorry for the delay in response - competing demands

Thomas, interesting so maybe whatever the problem is it is back. Let us know the response you get from Sparx.

As a result of this I had decided NOT to use VC to assist with moving packages from DEV to PROD and have removed all packages from source control. Maybe if the performance issue is resolved (finally) I may go back to that as I kinda liked it but I also may need to lock in a solution before that happens

I have extended my addin to provide a menu option to move a package from DEV to PROD which simply exports the package to a temporary file, opens the PROD repository, finds where to put it and imports the package.

The problem I have now is that I get an annoying dialog that says "The Server is Busy" which I have to say okay to several times. Hs anyone opened a second repository via API before? Is there any forseeable problem with doing this? Eg,

Code: [Select]


               Repository.GetProjectInterface().ExportPackageXMI(package.PackageGUID, EA.EnumXMIType.xmiEADefault, 1, 3, 0, 0, filename);

               EA.RepositoryClass otherRep = new EA.RepositoryClass();
               otherRep.EnableUIUpdates = false;
               otherRep.OpenFile2(Globals.ProductionRepository, Repository.GetCurrentLoginUser(false), "");

               EA.Project otherPrj = otherRep.GetProjectInterface();
               EA.Package target = otherRep.GetPackageByGuid(package.PackageGUID);
               if (target == null)
               {
                   target = Repository.GetPackageByID(package.ParentID);
                   target = otherRep.GetPackageByGuid(target.PackageGUID);
               }
               if (target == null)
                   throw new Exception("Cannot find target location for this package");

               otherPrj.ImportPackageXMI(target.PackageGUID, filename, 1, 0);

12

General Board / Re: Production/Development versions and change con

« on: October 02, 2007, 02:50:20 pm »

There was a bug with SVN localization which has been fixed in the last build.

I'm using the latest build - 817.
There is also a big delay when accessing the Package Control submenu and usually I have to do it twice.
Is 3 minutes to load a model with 27 packages (under VC) way out of the norm and indicating that something else is going wrong? BTW, my SVN repository is remote and accessed via http.

Peter, Thanks I hadn't realised that. I thought the VC ID (and path) was stored in the registry and not in the repository so was therefore set on a per user/workstation basis. Evidently not. So I could have PROD as NOT shared but with multiple users accessing it without the rights to update anything? And, yes, you can have different access rights for the same user in the two EA reps.

I still have the problem of the excessive load times though.

Edit: Ah, I can see now that the local paths are stored in, for example, C:\Documents and Settings\Mark\Application Data\Sparx Systems\EA\paths.txt.  Hmm, so can you REALLY have the same VC ID pointing to different working copies for different EA repositories for the same user. I suspect not but will try.

13

General Board / Re: Production/Development versions and change con

« on: October 01, 2007, 02:46:36 pm »

Martin, its just the way of things...an idea starts out simple and then the implementation get complicated!

Thomas, yes I would love to use controlled packages rather than version control but with controlled packages and XMI export you dont have the option to save nested controlled packages as stubs as you do with version control (as you noted).

There are some problems with this approach:
1. whether a user is connected to PROD or DEV he is using the same (local) SVN Working Copy so if he has it checked out in DEV it will appear checked out in PROD but may not be "loaded". DANGER

2. being a shared repository the GetLatest command is not available in PROD so one would have to do a checkout-checkin. Yuk.

3. in order to do a checkout-checkin the user must have update persmissions on Elements so I loose the ability to make PROD "readonly" unless onoly a special user can do the co-ci.

4. there is a HUGE performance hit when using SVN??? I only have 27 packages under VC and now the model takes over 3 minutes to load.

It's beginning to sound like this ain't the solution.

14

General Board / Re: Production/Development versions and change con

« on: September 27, 2007, 02:53:36 pm »

FWIW...
I think I will go with option 4 - two versions of the repository (Production & Development) both being shared models on DBMS with packages under source control (SVN) and individual workstations having a private working copy.

I will look at setting persmission on Production to not allow editing etc but only source control Gets (see below)

In effect, the SVN Repository becomes the production (approved) repository and the EA Production repository just has the latest packages loaded ready for viewing.

1. Analysts will open the EA Development repository and checkout the packages of interest to their private working copy however, as the EA Development repository is shared, other analysts can see work in progress.
2. When its approved then it gets checked back into the SVN Repository
3. The analyst then opens the EA Production repository and does a GetLatest (or GetPackage if its new)

I may automate Steps 2&3 in an AddIn.

Sound reasonable?

15

General Board / Re: Production/Development versions and change con

« on: September 24, 2007, 05:14:51 pm »

Thanks, Martin.
If it was just me then option 1 would be fine.
The end users are BA's that require it to all happen without thinking about it or learning anything new! If it's not push button simple and intuitive then it wont fly - and there needs to be minimal maintenance required!  

Regards,
Mark