Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "EMF Compare/Logical Model"

(EMF Compare)
(Chosen solution)
Line 24: Line 24:
 
== Chosen solution ==
 
== Chosen solution ==
  
EMF Compare now uses its own implementation aiming at this same goal, that we named ''synchronization model''.
+
EMF Compare now uses its own implementation aiming at this same goal, that we named ''synchronization model''. In short, instead of expecting the repository providers to query the model providers, EMF Compare will take the file (or set of files) that it is fed and expand it to the full logical model by querying the synchronization model.
 +
 
 +
This effectively allows us to bypass the aforementioned limitations since we no longer rely on the repository providers. However, it has limitations of its own as far as model coherence is concerned.
  
 
== How it works ==
 
== How it works ==
  
 
== Future enhancements ==
 
== Future enhancements ==

Revision as of 05:29, 4 October 2012

Logical Model

What is a logical model?

We name "logical model" a set of physical resources that form a coherent business model. For example, we could say that a given Java class forms a coherent logical model only when it is linked with all of its imported classes.

In the case of EMF, we name a logical resource (or model) the EMF resource loaded in memory, as opposed to a physical resource (or file) that is merely the serialization of this model on disk. A given EMF model can reference a number of other models, and it will be incoherent, or even sometimes corrupted, if these other models are not loaded in memory. In EMF, a given model can be serialized as a single file, fragmented in multiple files on disk, or reference multiple files. The logical model is only coherent when the whole set of its physical files is accessible.

Eclipse Team

The Eclipse Team project (referred as "Team" in this document) provides an API named "model providers". This API allows implementers to define the semantics of what is a "logical model" in his case. In short, it allows us to link any number of physical resources to a given "starting" file.

Technically, this is done through an extension point that can be implemented by anyone and that will adapt a file (a workspace IResource) to a set of files (a Team ResourceTraversal). The model providers can be queried by anyone who calls actions on workspace files in order to determine if this action can be done against a single file or if it should be executed against a set of files.

Limitations

Team only provides the API to define logical models. It is then the responsibility of its clients to properly query the model provider when calling an action. In the context of EMF Compare, we are interested in the "compare" actions. These actions are contributed by the repository providers (CVS, EGit, Subversive, Subclipse, Clearcase...). It is their responsibility, within the code of these actions, to query the model providers in order to determine if the selected files can be compared alone... or if they need to be compared along with a set of others.

  • The CVS plugin does not consistently use it. For example, when using "compare with > latest from HEAD" on a file that is part of a logical model, it will 'see' the logical model and open the "synchronize" perspective instead of a compare editor : this is what's expected. However, when the user, from the synchronization view, asks to see the differences (right-click then select 'open in compare editor')... CVS will not query the logical model, comparing the file alone (see also bug 345415).
  • The EGit, Subversive and Subclipse plugins never query the model providers for any comparison action.

EMF Compare

Chosen solution

EMF Compare now uses its own implementation aiming at this same goal, that we named synchronization model. In short, instead of expecting the repository providers to query the model providers, EMF Compare will take the file (or set of files) that it is fed and expand it to the full logical model by querying the synchronization model.

This effectively allows us to bypass the aforementioned limitations since we no longer rely on the repository providers. However, it has limitations of its own as far as model coherence is concerned.

How it works

Future enhancements