Re: [papyrus-rt-dev] Submitting changes to the website repo (including t

["charles+zeligsoft.com" <charles@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Peter!

+1 on the core C++ feature. This needs to be fixed as soon as possible. Could a bug be created for it?

I actually noticed the C++ one last night while trying to build a new, runnable model… This is a rather important problem at this point given the tutorial at Ericsson Modeling Days next week…

More inline below.

/Charles

On 2016.09.08, at 03:56 , Peter Cigéhn <peter.cigehn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

I checked the updated tester setup and have a few comments/questions:

* It looks like the tester setup model is missing the Papyrus RT Core C++ Feature (org.eclipse.papyrusrt.umlrt.cpp.feature.feature.group) which installs the C++ Language and its associated libraries/profiles into the default language framework and makes it possible to assign C++ as the default language to a user model. Feels pretty fundamental that this one is installed in the tester setup. Especially considering the ongoing work related to this and the identification of system elements in the run-time model library.

<cr>

+1 and this needs to be fixed as soon as possible. Can a bug be created for it?

</cr>

* I see that the tester setup has the Papyrus DSML Validation Feature installed (org.eclipse.papyrus.extra.dsml.validation.feature.feature.group). I would expect this one to only be part of the developer setup, since this feature is not relevant to "end-users", i.e. testers, and only to developers/tool-smiths creating their own DSML, which needs to tooling to generate the validation plugin. It only clutters the context menu in the model explorer with that menu choice for generating the validation plugin.

<cr>

+1 - Toolsmith stuff must not be exposed to modeling users.

</cr>

Any opinions regarding this?

/Peter Cigéhn

On 7 September 2016 at 17:31, Ernesto Posse <eposse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi all.

I just submitted a small update to the tester setup model on the website repo (https://git.eclipse.org/r/www.eclipse.org/papyrus-rt) and I forgot to pull it before submitting. I was not aware that the "Submit Type" for that repo is set to "Merge if necessary", instead of "Rebase if necessary" as is the case for the main repo. As a result you'll see a short lived branch in the repo's history and a merge node, instead of a linear history. 

This won't cause any trouble, but I just wanted to give people a heads-up, so that if anyone wants to submit a change to the website or the setup models, you should pull and rebase locally before submitting.

--

Ernesto Posse

Zeligsoft

_______________________________________________
papyrus-rt-dev mailing list
papyrus-rt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/papyrus-rt-dev

_______________________________________________
papyrus-rt-dev mailing list
papyrus-rt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/papyrus-rt-dev

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail