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 - Mr. Sanders

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13
Bugs and Issues / split sequence diagram
« on: November 20, 2008, 07:48:59 pm »

we have some sequence diagrams which became pretty long now.

Is there an easy way to split these large diagrams into a couple (at least 2) sequence diagrams?

Referencing other diagrams is pretty simple, but splitting seems to be impossible (at least to me).


Bugs and Issues / Re: clearcase and EA 7.1 830
« on: June 19, 2008, 01:13:37 am »
Hello Dave,

no  we are additionally using branches.
We are working for different countries (so have different laws and different implementations),
different version and different hardware.
Sometimes we have different plattforms too.

For all these cases we have to use branches.
if you take all developers there are about 3000+ working on the whole world spreaded in different countries using synchronised vobs

We are using unreserved checkouts since over 10 years and don't have problems with them.
We allways have problems with reserved checkouts.

It is not the job of the vob admins to solve such reserved checkout problems.

Of course they can, but you have to avoid it in advance.
Therefore use unreserved checkouts.

But this is a philosphical discussion.

Our problem is the EA.

In fact when the EA handles it in this way, we have to enforce it on the EA files via trigger (maybe).

Maybe we are using private models.


Bugs and Issues / Re: clearcase and EA 7.1 830
« on: June 18, 2008, 05:01:37 pm »
Hello Simon,

thank you for your answer.

So, what you want to say is: It is a feature.



Bugs and Issues / Re: clearcase and EA 7.1 830
« on: June 18, 2008, 01:58:34 am »
Hello Dave,

thank your for your answer.
But please read carefully user A and B is NOT checking in nor cancelling. The both checkout.

I think you are mixing two things.

The courser level is valid for the xmi/xml file, but as soon the file is checkout, the user is still working with the transactional db engine on the model and this is the problem.

The model in the db is changed.

all changes done are done in the transaction db model.
thus overriding the changes of the other (isn't it?)

And of course we are keeping the packages as small as possible.

We have to much developer to disallow unreserved checkouts (450+).
And we can not trust that all of this developers do clean reserved checkouts and do not  forgett to check in, when they go home or into vacation or any other heart attack reason or whatever.

So unreserved checkout is a must.

we do merges all the time.

This is not our problem.
The problem is how EA handles the checkout out model parts.

The changes of A/B should be visible to others when he checks in.
And not earlier.


Bugs and Issues / clearcase and EA 7.1 830
« on: June 17, 2008, 04:39:50 pm »

we are using clearcase 6 clients and have some problems with EA in the following way.

Unreserved checkouts are a very important need for our team development.

So User A checksout version X of a package and modifies it
in the EA project file.
User A closes EA.

Than User B checksout the same version X of the package and modifies it in the EA projekt file and closes EA.

User A reopens EA project and his changes are lost, because B has overridden his changes.

Is this a feature or a bug?


Bugs and Issues / Re: generate sequence diagrams from debugger
« on: April 26, 2008, 12:01:05 am »
Hello Vinx,

thank you for your answer, but we do not have problems to create the scripts or to attach the debugger (see my posting, we already set the breakpoints in the EA debugger).

The problem is, that the breakpoints have white question marks in it it red circle, even if the process is attached.

That means, the breakpoints are not realy attached to the code (see documentation in EA).
This is what we see in the modules tab of the debug workbench.

Only the hosting dll, which load our assembly dynamically are listed in the modules tab, but not the assembly which contains the code.

This worked fine in 7.0.
Now there seem to be problems, with dynamic assemblies.

So we CAN set the break points,
we CAN attach to the process,
but the break points are never reached.

When we start a process explorer, we see that our assembly is loaded.
On the ui we see that the code is running, but the ea is not able to attach the break point to it.

I wrote a bug report in the mean time.

Or is there anybody who can give us a workaround.


Bugs and Issues / generate sequence diagrams from debugger
« on: April 23, 2008, 07:06:45 pm »

we have a generic architecture, where the needed components are loaded at runtime via configuration files. So the components are of course not listed in the assembly manifest.

Now we want to create some sequence diagrams to track the method calls in some of this dynamic components.

So we configured debug scripts at the package  to attach to the running process.

When all dynamic components are loaded we try to start the debugger and set breakpoints.

When we set the breakpoints, the breakpoints always have the question mark (not attached!). When we open the module tab in the debug workbench, our dynamic modules are not listed.

When we open an external process explorer, we see our modules loaded, and when debugging  in devstudio everything is fine.

Is this a problem of the debug workbench, because of the missing assembly manifest entries?

Is there some other magic trick?

We have assemblies.

Any hints would be helpfull.
Thank you.

Bugs and Issues / Re: BUG: Metatype attributes not respected
« on: January 07, 2008, 05:28:56 am »
Hi David,

have you got a response to your bug report?

I think it will be fixed with 7.1.

Additionally I think 7.1 is late, because we reported some
major bugs in december and they told us to fix them ASAP.

HM? Let's see what that means.


Bugs and Issues / Re: BUG: Metatype attributes not respected
« on: January 07, 2008, 05:18:33 am »

I had the same problem a couple of weeks ago and asked for a solution here, but haven't got an answer till now.

It seems that EA just ignores them.


Bugs and Issues / Re: BUG in version control handling?
« on: December 20, 2007, 05:22:19 am »
Well done Michael!

I'm not surprised. Yes, it is a major problem, if you are using VC and have your setup. But Sparx cannot repair the way EA works unless someone tells them there is a problem - and characterizes the problem in enough detail to recognize and verify that it is a problem. That's where you came into the picture.

Yes, of course.
I just wonder that nobody else reacted on that problem before me.

I mean, I am not the only person using VC and EA.
And this is such a fundamental step, that anybody else should have found AND reported the problem before me.
That's what makes me wonder.

Nevertheless, they fix it.
And that's it, what counts.


Bugs and Issues / Re: BUG in version control handling?
« on: December 20, 2007, 01:06:18 am »

they will fix it!

have now reproduced the behaviour you are reporting and I can confirm that the current behaviour is incorrect.

A manual XMI import of a version controlled package file, should still move aside the child packages and restore them once the import is complete.  I will implement a correction to this behaviour as soon as possible.

But I am still surprised, that 'I' wrote that bug report.
This is a real major problem! Isn't it?


Bugs and Issues / Re: BUG in version control handling?
« on: December 14, 2007, 11:33:35 am »

is there anybody who can tell me how to use the batch import.

The dialog is always empty and shows no packages.


Bugs and Issues / Re: BUG in version control handling?
« on: December 14, 2007, 05:54:38 am »
Hi Thomas,

your developers only have to read the model?
So they don't do class design, sequence diagrams?

In our context the tool is used quite different.
Most of the coding is started in EA with class design
and code generation.


Bugs and Issues / Re: BUG in version control handling?
« on: December 14, 2007, 05:08:33 am »
Hello Thomas,
we are a subteam of the main project.
the main project has about 500 developers.

There is NO change manager.

There are very restrictive processes.

And even if there would be a change manager, every single developer must be able to chechin/checkout comfortably.


Bugs and Issues / Re: BUG in version control handling?
« on: December 14, 2007, 03:30:22 am »
Hello Thomas,

but they way you go is a bit dangerous in a team environment, isn't it.

Nobody knows which package is exported, imported, which version, etc.

If that is the way to handle it, it is a criterion to decide using another tool.

There are a couple of things with reverse engineering and nested controlled packages.
If we have this additional problem, that this tool is not usable in a team environment with more than 2 developers.

Currently we are 17, using other sub models from other teams
where hundreds of developers are working on. And if we are not able to conveniantly which means correctly checkout/checkin than we have to switch, I fear.

This is a tremendous handicap.


Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13