Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - potterm

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6
General Board / Re: Level of version control
« on: September 28, 2007, 01:09:10 pm »
I didn't see the correct answer here. So I'm adding my two cents.
The EAP file is a binary file. As such it is not subject to merging. SVN has facilities to merge text file sources but it has no way to merge binary files.

With that said, an EAP file would have to be checked out with a lock. This means the next person would not be able to work on it until it is checked back in.

I suggest you read the Sparx Whitepaper on version control, specifically the bit that describes the work-group model then you'll understand what I'm getting at  :)

General Board / Re: Level of version control
« on: September 23, 2007, 12:15:13 am »
Don't do it to your self. Shared artifacts in VC are a pain in the model ;). You'll be stcked with merging and all sort of nasty staff.
Better exporting to XMI and checking in-out package by package, may be it will bemore work, but it saves many head aches.

Agree that shared artifacts are a pain in the proverbial ;) but that's not what I'm suggesting.  If you use the workgroup model as proposed in the Sparx whitepaper then merging doesn't come into it - everyone sees the same model and there is only one working copy of each package's XMI file (not one per user), so merging isn't necessary.

General Board / Re: Level of version control
« on: September 22, 2007, 01:41:29 am »

No I don't think that's strictly true - if you put the SVN working folder on the fileshare and configure the model such that all users are using the same working folder, then I believe you can have shared check-outs across the whole team.  The downside to this is that the SVN check-ins may have to be made under a single user account (i.e. you set-up a group user for SVN, and whenever anybody checks in a package, the SVN version history will show that single user account and not the actual user that performed the check-in).

I recommend you look at the Sparks White paper on version control, which explains all this.  I think it's what they call the "Workgroup Deployment Model".



General Board / Re: Making visible element - notes
« on: December 13, 2006, 05:20:50 am »
Hi R.B.

Perhaps not exactly what you are looking for, but you could also create a UML note element on the same diagram, link it to the element (using a note link) and then configure the note to display the "notes" attribute of that element.

This is done by right clicking on the note link and selecting "Link this note to an element feature".  In the resulting dialog, select "Notes" and then your newly created note will display whatever you've entered in the notes field of the element to which it is linked.

I hope that makes sense!


General Board / Re: Am I the only one who hates the template edito
« on: November 30, 2006, 05:08:56 am »
Thanks for your explanation Alistair - but does this work with Word figure numbers?  What I need to be able to do is embed an RTF report in a Word document that has existing figures in it, such that Word can re-number the EA figures when you update fields in the document.  So the generator needs to be able to create Word field codes I think.  There seems to be some features in the RTF editor/generator which get close to providing this, but I couldn't ever get Word Figure numbering to work with it.


General Board / Re: Am I the only one who hates the template edito
« on: November 29, 2006, 05:45:09 am »
I share everyone's frustrations with the RTF editor - as others have said, at best the editor is buggy (especially when building templates, copy/paste etc. etc.) and in some areas the report generation doesn't do quite what I want so I've resigned myself to building an add-in that will automate Word directly.

But this is a slower project - in the meantime I find myself using a combination of the RTF editor and for jobs it doesn't do well a macro from within Word (using EA automation to pull things out of the model).

Here are some of the things I'm hoping to build into my add-in which are currently lacking in EA's own document generator:

- Figure numbering
- Finer grained selection of elements to include in reports (e.g. all elements in diagram, selections based on attribute filters etc.)
- Better control over MS-Word formatting (i.e. define the template in Word, allowing exact formatting to be applied rather than relying on consistency of styles etc.).

It would be great if the new release were to address some of these issues, but I doubt it somehow.

I don't wish to knock EA - it's a fine product (especially for the price), but for my particular requirements I think a "home-grown" reporting solution will suit me best (and of course all credit to EA for giving me the flexibility to do this).  And having said that, I'm not convinced that other CASE tools do a better job on reporting - all have their quirks I think, and I've frequently heard report generation horror stories about tools costing many times what EA does.


General Board / Re: BUG: Release notes don't agree with Release
« on: December 19, 2006, 12:10:04 am »
Thanks Paolo (should have read your msg properly ;)).  This is indeed v. useful.  I'll probably renew my support and get this build, but not till next year now (only 4 working days left for me ;D, so will probably not bother until 2007).


General Board / Re: BUG: Release notes don't agree with Release
« on: December 18, 2006, 10:54:16 pm »
Hi Paolo - what do you mean by the new notes compartment?  Do you mean the long awaited formatted notes capability?

P.S. my Sparx support period just expired so I don't have the new build - I tend to wait until there's a new build that I think is worth upgrading to before renewing, but this just might swing it...


General Board / Re: Defining a key
« on: December 14, 2006, 01:32:29 am »

Thanks for the clarification guys - my mistake  ;)


General Board / Re: Defining a key
« on: December 13, 2006, 05:42:26 am »
I think you can do this with stereotypes.  I.e. I think individual stereotypes can be given specific colour settings which are applied when the stereotype is used.  I tried this some time ago and it worked.  However, this doesn't seem to work for stereotypes created as part of a UML profile.  I.e. I recently tried this by defining a number of stereotypes in a profile package, and gave each stereotype specific colour coding (in the hope that this would be translated into colour settings in the resulting stereotypes as part of the applied profile), but it didn't work.


EDIT:  Hint, hint - any chance of adding this feature Sparx?

General Board / Re: Stereotype on constraints in UML Profile
« on: December 03, 2006, 07:30:41 am »
Thanks for the suggestion Paolo - yes I did check for this, and just to be absolutely certain I imported the profile into a completely clean (i.e. new) model, but get the same behaviour.

It seems to be the stereotyped constraint that is causing problems - for some reason EA treats it as a stereotyped note when imported through a profile.


General Board / Re: Stereotype on constraints in UML Profile
« on: December 03, 2006, 04:49:31 am »
One further point - looking at the resulting XML generated for the profile it makes no reference to "note" elements whatsoever.  The <Apply type> tag has the value "Constraint", so it seems as if this could be an issue with the import of the profile...

General Board / Stereotype on constraints in UML Profile
« on: December 03, 2006, 04:40:10 am »
I'm not sure whether I'm doing something wrong or whether this is bug, but here goes...

Basically I want to create a stereotyped constraint that shows an alternative image to the default "note-like" format used for constraints.

So I've created a stereotype "timingConstraint" that is associated with a ShapeScript which draws an hour-glass.   When this stereotype is applied to constraints it all works perfectly - I get an hour glass instead of the default note-like constraint.

However, I now want to include this stereotype in a UML profile, so I created it in a profile package as follows:
  • stereotype class "timingConstraint" with an _image attribute containing the ShapeScript (i.e. using the undocumented mechanism for including a ShapeScript in a UML Profile, as detailed in other posts on this forum)
  • a metaclass "Constraint" which the stereotype class extends
This all seems to work OK - the profile generates and I can import it into my model and show the stereotype constraint in the toolbox.  However, when I drag the stereotyped constraint onto the diagram two things go wrong:
  • It gets displayed in note format rather than using the stereotyped ShapeScript
  • Editing the resulting constraint gives me a Notes dialog rather than the normal Constraint dialog. In fact the icon created in the toolbox by this profile seems to create note elements rather than constraint elements.
Investigating further, I discovered that on import the profile actually creates two stereotypes rather than the single one I intended:
  • A first "timingConstraint" stereotype with a base class of "note".
  • A second "timingConstraint" stereotype with a bass class of "constraint". (Edit: and it includes the ShapeScript created within the original profile).
So it seems as if the profile is either getting generated incorrectly, or imported incorrectly (or I'm doing something wrong).

Any clues anyone?


General Board / Re: How to map component I/Fs to sub-component I/F
« on: November 23, 2006, 05:14:25 am »
Scott Ambler covers this to some extent in his book (relevant extract available at:  See Figure 4 on that page....


General Board / Re: Modelling a PDU
« on: July 06, 2006, 05:33:38 am »

If you're happy to use a free text table and associate it with an element or package, you can use a Linked Document instead (use the Linked Document option on the context menu).

You could then just create the table using the RTF editor (it supports MS-Word like tables).  The editor supports templates, so you could could create a generic template for PDU definitions and EA will prompt you for the template to use the first time you create the linked doc.

The docs created in this way can also be inserted into any RTF reports that you generate.

The only downside to this is that you're not modelling the PDU definition - it's just a free text description.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6