Notice: this Wiki will be going read only early in 2024 and edits will no longer be possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.
Difference between revisions of "ModelingPlatform/EclipseConEuropeNov2 2011"
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
'''End-User Companies'''<br> | '''End-User Companies'''<br> | ||
End-user companies to give a summary of what is missing in Eclipse open source modeling, e.g. feature, support, documentation, migration, training, etc., what is their current initiatives if applicable. | End-user companies to give a summary of what is missing in Eclipse open source modeling, e.g. feature, support, documentation, migration, training, etc., what is their current initiatives if applicable. | ||
| − | *Dominique Toupin, Ericsson | + | *Dominique Toupin, Ericsson |
| − | + | *Pierre Gaufillet, Airbus | |
| + | *Robert Blust, UBS AG | ||
| + | *Benjamin Kamphausen BMW | ||
| Line 34: | Line 36: | ||
'''Implementer Companies'''<br> | '''Implementer Companies'''<br> | ||
What is the view of implementer companies, their core expertise, what implementation can have a big impact on open source modeling next year, low hanging fruit, what is their current initiatives, etc. | What is the view of implementer companies, their core expertise, what implementation can have a big impact on open source modeling next year, low hanging fruit, what is their current initiatives, etc. | ||
| − | *Stephan Eberle, itemis update, | + | *Stephan Eberle, itemis update |
| + | *Remi Schnekenburger, CEA LIST | ||
| Line 40: | Line 43: | ||
Review first version of [http://wiki.eclipse.org/images/b/b0/Introduction_to_Eclipse_Modeling_Working_Group.zip Modeling slides] for end user companies, identify additional benefits for end user companies in order to facilitate budget approval | Review first version of [http://wiki.eclipse.org/images/b/b0/Introduction_to_Eclipse_Modeling_Working_Group.zip Modeling slides] for end user companies, identify additional benefits for end user companies in order to facilitate budget approval | ||
*Gaël Blondelle, Obeo, feedback from the OPEES group | *Gaël Blondelle, Obeo, feedback from the OPEES group | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | === Improvements areas interesting for end user companies === | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Scalable logical model merge | ||
| + | *Ability to connect to different physical repository technologies, e.g. Git, | ||
| + | *Advanced, flexible and efficient code generation. Should be simple and efficient to do M2M and M2T transforms. | ||
| + | *Good implementation of UML standard. Most tools implement some part well but skip others. MagicDraw is good reference tool to compare against. | ||
| + | *UAL/ALF implementation | ||
| + | *Team development capabilities across distributed models and repositories | ||
| + | *Model Simulation capabilities | ||
| + | *Trace and Debug capabilities connected to code generation feature | ||
| + | *Stable and clean user interface. We don't want to see a lot of Eclipse noise. | ||
| + | *Ability to work with fragmented models | ||
| + | *Good performance on large model repositories. | ||
| + | *Ability to import from existing tools without information loss. A huge bonus with be to preserve all diagram information. | ||
| + | *Traceability with requirements and text cases | ||
Revision as of 16:54, 2 November 2011
Contents
Eclipse Modeling Ecosystem Face to Face Meeting at EclipseCon Europe
9h00 - 12h00, Wednesday November 2, 2011
Conference room Herzog Eberhard Ludwig at the Nestor Hotel, Ludwigsburg, Germany
Attendees
- Dominique Toupin, Ericsson
- Gaël Blondelle, Obeo
- Pierre Gaufillet, Airbus
- Stephan Eberle, itemis
- Robert Blust, UBS AG
- Bran Selic, Malina Software
- Martin Flügge, MFTechnologies
- Alvaro Sanchez, Ericsson
- Remi Schnekenburger, CEA LIST
- Benjamin Kamphausen, Fraunhofer ESK
Agenda Items
End-User Companies
End-user companies to give a summary of what is missing in Eclipse open source modeling, e.g. feature, support, documentation, migration, training, etc., what is their current initiatives if applicable.
- Dominique Toupin, Ericsson
- Pierre Gaufillet, Airbus
- Robert Blust, UBS AG
- Benjamin Kamphausen BMW
Possible Synergies Between Eclipse Working Group
Modeling synergies between Automotive Working Group, OPEES (PolarSys) Working Group, Multicore
Implementer Companies
What is the view of implementer companies, their core expertise, what implementation can have a big impact on open source modeling next year, low hanging fruit, what is their current initiatives, etc.
- Stephan Eberle, itemis update
- Remi Schnekenburger, CEA LIST
End-User Companies Business Case Brainstorming
Review first version of Modeling slides for end user companies, identify additional benefits for end user companies in order to facilitate budget approval
- Gaël Blondelle, Obeo, feedback from the OPEES group
Improvements areas interesting for end user companies
- Scalable logical model merge
- Ability to connect to different physical repository technologies, e.g. Git,
- Advanced, flexible and efficient code generation. Should be simple and efficient to do M2M and M2T transforms.
- Good implementation of UML standard. Most tools implement some part well but skip others. MagicDraw is good reference tool to compare against.
- UAL/ALF implementation
- Team development capabilities across distributed models and repositories
- Model Simulation capabilities
- Trace and Debug capabilities connected to code generation feature
- Stable and clean user interface. We don't want to see a lot of Eclipse noise.
- Ability to work with fragmented models
- Good performance on large model repositories.
- Ability to import from existing tools without information loss. A huge bonus with be to preserve all diagram information.
- Traceability with requirements and text cases