| 05 Jan 2005 |
Eclipse is an evolving platform |
Eclipse/GEF is rapidly evolving and the current version (3.1) has not yet been released as stable. |
We have decided to settle on version 3.0.1 of all Eclipse tools that we will be using. |
Closed |
| 05 Jan 2005 |
New Tools |
We are using various tools that we don't necessarily have experience with: Ant, BugZilla, CVS, DOORS, Eclipse+GEF+EMF, JUnit, Rational XDE, TWiki, UCMNav |
See below |
Closed |
| 05 Jan 2005 |
Varying schedules |
Must find way so that all team members can contribute equally, regardless of schedule differences. |
Semester over |
Closed |
| 05 Jan 2005 |
Difficult deployment |
We may have to support different versions of Eclipse, testing different operating systems, distributing the plug-in with and without Eclipse |
We have decided on supporting only Eclipse/GEF version 3.0.1 and EMF v2.0.1, testing only on Windows XP SP2 and distributing the plug-in without Eclipse. |
Closed |
| 23 Jan 2005 |
New version of the DTD |
We await the new version of the DTD that we will have to support (read/write). UCM Version 0.23 is already on the website |
Supporting the DTD is no longer in the scope of our project |
Closed |
| 23 Jan 2005 |
Requirements |
We have defined the requirements definition process in which Daniel Amyot will have an important role but they have yet to be drafted |
Requirements have been drafted. |
Closed |
| 15 Feb 2005 |
Meta-model |
We await our meta-model draft for the notation's elements to be used by our tool |
We have received it and integrated it. |
Closed |
| 15 Feb 2005 |
Paths |
We're not sure how paths will be implemented in our system. Must experiment. |
Experimentation done, success! |
Closed |
| 15 Feb 2005 |
Element behaviour |
We're not sure how we will determine our element's behaviour. We're not sure to what point our meta-model will define this. We want to avoid having to specify this for all elements. |
We have analyzed and categorized our elements behaviour |
Closed |
| 15 Feb 2005 |
Stubs |
Stubs are the second riskiest UCM element. They have deep implications in many views and the editor but haven't bene prototyped. |
[The core problem, multiple maps per file, has been solved ] |
Ongoing |
| 15 Feb 2005 |
Divide and conquer |
Requirements need to be divided into micro objectives that can be tracked in our task management system. Until then, we can't plan completion |
See BugZilla |
Closed |
| 15 Feb 2005 |
Unit tests |
We haven't formally written down our unit tests as they are too closely bound to our architecture. |
See JUnit Test Plan |
Closed |
| 15 Feb 2005 |
Get Coding |
Not everyone is as familiar with the framework because not everyone was prototyping |
With the end of the semester, developers have been contributing code much more frequently. |
Closed |
| 10 May 2005 |
Views |
We know what we want for the views, but we've pushed back coding them |
- |
Ongoing |
| 10 May 2005 |
Lack of time |
We're progressing nicely but the Eclipse learning curve is steep. We should focus on getting the core features done and take care not to spread out efforts over too many features. |
- |
Ongoing |
| 10 May 2005 |
Req Save Backup |
We're not sure how to hookup to the local history mechanism in Eclipse |
- |
Ongoing |