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 - Geert Bellekens

Pages: 1 ... 804 805 [806] 807 808 ... 818

I think there are a couple more reasons why not to mess with the EA database directly such as:

  • Deployment of your tools for a new project (e.g. different EA database) is going to be a bit more difficult
  • Features such as Project transfer will probably not work anymore
  • Changing database type (e.g. from eap file to dbms) is going to be difficult (because of the 'Project transfer')
  • Upgrading to a new version of EA will always be monitored closely to find out if the upgrade process doesn't ruin the "hacked" database parts; and you have to test whether the new version still has no issues with the changed/added database parts

So sure you can hack away in the EA database itself, but unless there is a really good reason I would not advise it.


PS. Nice badge you have there  ;)

Yes, should all be possible.
Whether you want to spend energy to dynamically create the database and linked tables is another question.
Depends on how much of those databases you need of course.
If you only need it a few it would probably be faster to create them manually.



The EAP file is a standard MS Access file so you should be able to create a new table using the correct MS Access version, or an SQL connection.

The Repository.SQLQuery doesn't really allow updates, so you could get an error when trying to pass DDL to that method. (although it might be executed correctly as well, who knows...)

But; while technically possible I wouldn't advise you modify the existing database structure of EA. Why don't you create a new database for you own needs, that sits next to the (standard) EA database?

There are way to query cross-database you know.


I considered this opportunity, but one of my main goals is make the most EA and hooks it provides (EA capability-reuse) without reinventing the wheel, even if it's not the best model validation engine on the market.
However, I can always improve it through writing code, I guess...

P.S. I checked out your articles, they're really interesting! ;)


I understand why you would think like that however be aware that:
  • The vendor lockin will increase when you write tools specific for EA.
  • You will probably get stuck at some time or another with the built-in features. You will then have to either live with the shortcomings, or write the whole thing from scratch after all.

You are not alone with these considerations, that is one of the reasons I started the Create Open source tooling framework topic.

I am working on something like this, at first only for my own EA <-> UmlCanvas needs.
Once it reaches a somewhat mature state I'll definitely share it via the community site.


Yes, I guess so...

Or you could step off the "real time" validation and go to a "Model Validation" scheme where you validate (verify) the model as a whole afterwards.

With the current state of EA and the hooks it provides I think the latter will probably be your best option.

As for the model validation; I would seriously consider NOT using the built-in facility, but write your own from scratch. (that's how I did it anyway). I'm afraid the built-in validator will be too limited for your purposes.

I've recently written some articles about Modelling Quality and a Validation Tool that might interest you.



I think indeed writing some validation code in the EA_OnPreNewConnector event handler is probably the best way to go.
I don't think you have to follow the rules template, but I could be a good idea as it would allow you to use those rules in the model validator as well.


Have you already tracked down wich statement exactly is giving you the error?


Are you sure the type of the diagram you are adding is correct?



In the database this is seems to be related to the column BorderStyle on the t_object table.
If you can access it through the API then it will probably be through the StyleEx field.


PS. The way I usually try to figure this out is to create a new eap file and create only the objects I'm interested in. (in this case two boundaries) and then use MS Access to figure out where EA has stored which information.


Although the "nested classes" principle may be arguable, it is in fact valid UML.
I think they do it this way to ensure the "Tree like" graph when importing an XSD. When using compositions they could end up having either name conflicts, or elements having different "parents".


Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: Package Undo Checkout
« on: January 11, 2010, 07:34:53 pm »
Thats because it isn't there  :'(

VC is only barely supported in the API.
Maybe, just maybe... they might improve that in version 8.0.
I think I remember one or two responses from the Sparxians that hinted something like that.


Too bad, can't help in that case.



Do you mean a report with the RTF generator, or in general using the API?


Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: Enterprise Architect & Git
« on: December 30, 2009, 06:10:33 pm »

Try a search on the keyword "git" and you should find several references to users who are using git as version control.
I think the user "wowbagger" uses it.


Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: HTML and CSS style editor
« on: December 29, 2009, 06:30:29 pm »

I think you'll have to be a bit more precise on what and how you are trying to achieve


Pages: 1 ... 804 805 [806] 807 808 ... 818