[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: (FC-Devel) Cooperation between FreeCASE and Argo/UML

My thoughts on this is that we should attempt some type of merger.  My
thinking is:

1) We are attempting very similar products.
2) Looking at FreeCase requirements of multi-platform, Java is the best
choice for the front end.  Argo/UML is already Java.
3) The work that FreeCase has done has been back-end, not GUI.  Argo fits
this nicely.

My goal in getting involved is to get the tool out the public.  There is no
ego here.  If we can get by the issues Jason mentioned, I think we should
try for it.


-----Original Message-----
From:	Jason Elliot Robbins [SMTP:jrobbins@cadet.ics.uci.edu]
Sent:	Thursday, March 04, 1999 3:53 PM
To:	freecase-devel@seul.org
Cc:	jrobbins@cadet.ics.uci.edu
Subject:	(FC-Devel) Cooperation between FreeCASE and Argo/UML

Hi Sami and other FreeCASErs,

What level of cooperation between FreeCASE and Argo/UML do you think
is appropriate?

We are both trying to do basically the same thing.  I think it would
be great if we could cooperate, or even merge.  I know that you have
put a lot of time into FreeCASE just as I have put a lot of time into

Some issues that have prevented merger before were
  (1) a difference in licensing terms, Jeff wanted GPL, I wanted a
      non-contaminating license;

  (2) a difference in project scope,  FreeCASE has set a much larger
      scope than Argo/UML in terms of client/server and multi-user;

  (3) Argo/UML is 100% and started out java-centric while FreeCASE was
      intended to be multilingual from the start.

Another difference is that Argo/UML started with a lot of code and is
now struggling to organize people, whereas FreeCASE started with a lot
of people and is now struggling to write code.

To address these issues we might do one or more of the following:
  (1) Keep the projects separate, and have a kind of frendly

  (2) Keep the projects separate, but share some java code and try to
      use compatable file formats.

  (3) Merge the projects by trying to work though differences in scope
      and priorities and end up with one tool.

  (4) Merge the projects but not the tools.  Current FreeCASE
      people would continue to work on repository issues while
      Argo/UML people would focus on the single-user Java app and user
      interface issues.  Argo/UML could become a "sub-project" of
      FreeCASE and other subprojects might arise.

I am sure that there are other possibilies.

BTW, I have also been talking with members of the Juml project
(www.egroups.com/list/juml) (formerly known as the JFA ooEditor).  I
believe that their project leader has left and they are now
considering new cooperation options.  At least one Juml person (out of
about 4) has voiced support for a three-way merger.