| Re: [papyrus-rt-dev] Papyrus-RT feature structure |
Ok, I've changed the name of the "all" feature to "base". It now looks a bit better to the end-user, but there is still some confusion. When clicking "Install New Software..." we get this:...so we still see a top-level "Papyrus-RT" *category* that contains the "Papyrus-RT Feature" (because I didn't change any structure). When we select this feature only we get:So at the top-level it's still ambiguous.Simon suggested to call the "base" feature "Papyrus-RT Modelling". How about if we rename the current "Papyrus-RT Feature" as suggested by Simon, so that the result would bePapyrus-RT\ Modelling
└── Papyrus-RT\ Base
├── Papyrus-RT\ Common
├── Papyrus-RT\ Core
├── Papyrus-RT\ Profile
└── Papyrus-RT\ Tooling
Papyrus-RT\ C++
Papyrus-RT\ Codegen
Papyrus-RT\ Compare
Papyrus-RT\ RSA-RTE\ Importer
Papyrus-RT\ Runtime
Papyrus-RT\ Textual
This is essentially the same as it was with the following renamings:Papyrus-RT Feature -> Papyrus-RT Modelling Feature (this deals with the perspective issue)Papyrus-RT All Feature -> Papyrus-RT Base FeatureOn Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 3:13 PM Ernesto Posse <eposse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Thanks for taking time from your vacations Christian.So there was a big misunderstanding when that name was given, because the "All" feature is certainly not comprehensive.Since the feature is not comprehensive, the original objection to calling to calling it "Base" goes away. Simon says I should rename it "Base" (but I won't change the structure).Perhaps in the future we can create a truly comprehensive "All" feature.--Ernesto PosseZeligsoftOn Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 2:57 PM Christian Damus <give.a.damus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:I had suggested "All" because I thought that feature was intended to contain all of what is Papyrus-RT. The top feature being only "glue" to bring ancillary content like the perspective. It had seemed odd to name a feature "base" that was actually comprehensive.
And, yes, I'm on vacation.
Cheers,Christian______________________________
On Jul 17, 2017, 19:10 +0100, Ernesto Posse <eposse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, wrote:
Ah. I was unaware of that bug (and the gerrit) or the fact that the structure was introduced to solve it.But reading through the bug comments, it is still unclear why are there any features "outside", in particular the Papyrus-RT Compare and Migration features.Furthermore, I do not understand the solution. The "top-level" feature adds the requirement of the Papyrus perspective, and as per Camille's comments, it's installable to all users. Then the "Papyrus-RT All" feature (I still think that's a terrible name, if it doesn't include *all*), includes the profile, core, common and tooling features, and apparently it's "[...] separately installable for tool providers". Why tool providers? This contains *the* stuff that end-users install.In any case, if I (as a user) go to "Install New Software..." and point to the update site and I select "group items by category", I see two: "Papyrus-RT Codegen" and "Papyrus-RT". The first contains codegen, runtime and textual. Here's the first confusing issue: why is "codegen" not included in the other feature? Is codegen not part of Papyrus-RT? The second feature (i.e. "Papyrus-RT") contains everything else, including a nested "Papyrus-RT Feature" which is *very* confusing. The user might wonder "what's in this one? which should I choose?". If I unselect "group items by category", I see "Papyrus-RT All Feature", which will not include all. As an end-user, I would say that is a terribly confusing experience.I think the most important stakeholder is the end-user.So the top-level feature seems to resolve the perspective issue. But it doesn't explain why other features lie outside. If the structure is to remain in place, couldn't we at least change the name of the "All" feature? That is *really* confusing.(Unfortunately Christian is on vacations, so he cannot comment as to why he proposed to call it "all".)--Ernesto PosseZeligsoft
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 3:59 AM Peter Cigéhn <peter.cigehn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Hi,As Camille indicates, this new feature structure was introduced to solve bug 494931. Regarding the naming of the new nested feature it was discussed in the related Gerrit change. As can be seen fromt the patch sets this new feature was actually named "base" initially (in patch set 1), but Christian opposed and Camille changed it to "all" (in patch set 2) based on Christian's input. On the other hand, Christian did oppose to the new nested feature itself.Personally I think it is a little bit too late in the release cycle of 1.0 to start discussing the feature structure. We have had these discussion on and off numerous times on this mailing list, including a discussion if/how we are going to support advanced users to install using the ordinary "Install New Software..." menu in Eclipse which we so far never really have provided a good support for.I would also like to understand who are the main stakeholders and what are the driving forces behind the different proposed feature structures? The driving force behind this change was a tool smith that was authoring an Oomph setup file. Which stakeholder in mind do we have for the different proposals? Tool smiths authoring Oomph setup files? Advanced end-users using "Install New Software..." (which we don't really support in a good way anyway)?If we are considering the latter, we also have the aspect of how we categorize the features (so far we seem to only have focused on the feature structure and how it looks like *after* you actually have made the installation). To my understanding this new "all" feature is not even categorized, and thus does not even show up when using "Install New Software..." when you have the "Group Items by Category" enabled. And we other aspects when it comes to categories, e.g. why do we have a separate "Codegen" category where codegen, run-time and textual are placed? And only one "top level" for category for everything else (expect this new "all" feature then).So at this stage of the release cycle, I would go for option 5, i.e. status quo. Regarding whether it shall be named "base" or "all" I really don't have any strong opinion. Maybe Christian who objected to the initial name of "base" on the Gerrit change should give his view regarding this./Peter Cigéhn______________________________On 17 July 2017 at 09:12, Camille Letavernier <cletavernier@eclipsesource.com > wrote:
Hi,
I think there were a ticket to rename "all" to "base". Basically, the different between "Papyrus-RT" and "Papyrus-RT All" is that one imports some optional Papyrus plug-ins (i.e. the Perspective), whereas the "Base/All" feature only imports the Papyrus-RT plug-ins and lets P2 resolve required dependencies.So - none of these options actually reach the expected goal :) (But in most cases, it's just a matter of renaming "All" to "Base", keeping the current "Papyrus-RT" as-is, and optionally adding a parent "Papyrus-RT Complete" somewhere)Camille
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 5:43 PM, Ernesto Posse <eposse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:______________________________Hello everyone. While trying the updated version of the Oomph setup in preparation for the 1.0 release I noticed that the structure of features in the "Installation Details" dialog is a bit odd:First, there is a "Papyrus-RT Feature" which includes only "Papyrus-RT All Feature" (which could be seen as grammatically awkward) and it does *not* include *all* features. Codegen, C++, Textual, Compare and the RSA-RTE importer are all outside.Is this the way it's supposed to be?Charles tells me that some of these features, like Codegen, Runtime and C++ are supposed to be optional, and not part of the "core" or "base" (Profile+Core+Common+Tooling). That's fine, but 1) what about "Compare"? Is it a "core" feature? How about the importer?Why have two levels of nesting under "Papyrus-RT Feature"? That seems very awkward. I would suggest one of four options:Option 1) Only one top-level Papyrus-RT Feature called "Papyrus-RT Complete Feature" (or something like that) with two sub-features "Papyrus-RT Base" and "Papyrus-RT Extras":Complete/
├── Base
│ ├── Common
│ ├── Core
│ ├── Profile
│ └── Tooling
└── Extras
├── C++
├── Codegen
├── Compare
├── Importer
├── Textual
└── RuntimeOption 2) Two separate top-level features "Papyrus-RT Base" and "Papyrus-RT Extras":
Base/
├── Common
├── Core
├── Profile
└── Tooling
Extras/
├── C++
├── Codegen
├── Compare
├── Importer
├── Textual
└── RuntimeOption 3) Like option 1, but "extras" are not bundled in one feature:Complete/
├── Base
│ ├── Common
│ ├── Core
│ ├── Profile
│ └── Tooling
├── C++
├── Codegen
├── Compare
├── Importer
├── Textual
└── RuntimeOption 4) Similar to the status-quo but removing the extra level of nesting:Base/
├── Common
├── Core
├── Profile
└── Tooling
C++
Codegen
Compare
Importer
Textual
Runtime
Option 5) The status-quo (with a better name for the "All" Feature):Papyrus-RT/
└── Base
├── Common
├── Core
├── Profile
└── Tooling
C++
Codegen
Compare
Importer
Textual
Runtime
Any thoughts or opinions?--Ernesto PosseZeligsoft--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
--
Camille LetavernierSenior Software Engineer
EclipseSource FrancePhone: +33 1 85 41 09 21Hangouts: cletavernier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxEclipseSource France SASPalaiseau-Entreprises7 rue de la Croix Martre91120 PalaiseauGeneral Manager: Remi SchnekenburgerRegistered Office: 7 rue de la Croix Martre, 91120 Palaiseau, FranceCommercial Register 824 977 516 R.C.S. EVRY
_______________________________________________
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 --______________________________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
--Ernesto PosseZeligsoft--Ernesto PosseZeligsoft
_______________________________________________
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
