RE: [gmt-dev] evolving GMT in a fully open process that allows others to

["Ghica van Emde Boas" <emdeboas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> work on the GMT platform. I.e. I think it does not make sense to continue
to
> develop two template engines in parallel. For that consolidation to happen
> we need *solid* documentation of both the Fuutje and the architectureware
> design.
Make that three. I recently added to possibility to use the Velocity
template engine instead of the FUUT-je plugin template engine. Since the
FUUT-je one is only a plugin (as is the new Velocity one), it could easily
be taken out, if I were not too lazy to convert my old templates...
If we are deciding on a standard here, then I strongly suggest to take
Velocity.

I agree with the documentation part. Bear with me. I have really started on
it...

> On the other hand we may not want "hard" dependencies on Eclipse and may
> decide to create a plug-in architecture that is not tied to any specific
> IDE. Suggest that we are not religious but pragmatic, i.e. we should avoid
> reinventing infrastructure that has nothing to do with model
> transformation/generation.
> Ghica, Jeff, what do you think with your GMT hat on?

I think that we should try to make GMT into a lean, flexible, distributed
set of web-services. Eclipse is not at all suitable for this. Only as a
development IDE for the PSM part of GMT.

> > I've got some *very good* news for the architectureware community:
> > The AMG (Architecture Management Group - B. Oestereich, W.Neuhaus,
> P.Roßbach and
> > me) resp. the associated companies have decided to place the
> AMG-CarSharing
> > ShowCase at sourceforge/architectureware as Tutorial/QuickStart sample!

That is indeed very good news. Now for some time to try it out...

Regards,
Ghica van Emde Boas
Bronstee.com Software & Services b.v.
e-mail: emdeboas@xxxxxxxxxxxx,
tel: +31 23 5474422,
or: +31 6 53368747 (mobile)
fax: +31 23 5473347