[argouml-dev] some architectural thoughts

Hi,

over the years I sometimes wonder what's best for the future of ArgoUML or, more general, for open source UML design tools. Most subsystems of ArgoUML need lot's of work:

- model: we have two model implementations, our model interface is ok to keep working with it --> keep
- kernel: project management needs important improvements (multiple open projects, model management) --> replace or keep?
- persistence: some issues like pgml or team collaboration requirements --> replace or keep?
- property panels: new implementation based on xml templates --> keep
- graphics: we have issues with tigris gef(?) --> keep or replace?
- GUI: lots of criticism --> keep or replace?
- critics: unique --> keep

and so on.

So sometimes I wonder if too many parts of ArgoUML have come to a natural end-of-life to just keep on making punctual improvements?

ArgoEclipse is a nice idea, but it suffers from too many architectural shortcomings of ArgoUML's core.

I even sometimes think to start from scratch or contribute parts of ArgoUML to another project like Papyrus and just try to reuse from our code base rather than keeping ArgoUML alive. (My motivation is very low at the moment...)

What do you think?

Regards,
Thomas
-- 
Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir
belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de

------------------------------------------------------
http://argouml.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=450&dsMessageId=2865934

To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [[email protected]].
To be allowed to post to the list contact the mailing list moderator, email: [[email protected]]