(FC-Devel) AFL 3: MOF, UXF and CVS

[Danny Werner <danny@vrijdag.xs4all.nl>]

architecture + feature list part 3

(Jason):
> One really helpful thing is the UML standard.  If we can agree on a
> common data repository and data representation then we could prbably
> be able to do a star-topology system where everything goes through the
> repository.  If you look at the history of CASE standards, most of
> them rely on shared repositories.  

Succesful integration of (not to big) models into one is 
only possible after very intensive communication amongst
people having deep knowledge of the individual models themselves.
Nobody has the complete model in his or her mind when working
on a part. Why should we expect a computer system (one central
leading repository) to be capable of that complexity. 
Why should anyone think that people are able to design
such a system. The power of the internet stems from not
having the need of much -if any, by now- permanent central
authority.

> We would be relying on t standards
> such as OMG's MOF to determine what the interface to the repository

I did not study the MOF yet. I will. Jason's suggestions are very
good until now, so I'll trust him on this one.

> should be.  An alternative would be to rely on a standard streaming
> format, like XMI or UXF and a common representation of a UML document
> in memory.  File based integrations are not so flashy, but they work,
> they are easier to test, and it would make it easier to integrate with
> existing development utilities, e.g., CVS.

Yep, let's not make another Island. Let's make bridges.