The code that was in Graph, was designed
to build a State Machine off of a State Chart
as defined in UML.
I was experimenting with it as a way of testing.
(Tests would be run straight from UML. Very little
Java/Python/Ruby code would be required.)
I don't think the experiment went very far, but
Maybe it can be part of the documentation ?
That way people can use the code / learn from the code.
I'll yank it out anyway and if you decide to add it as docs, just revive
them in a different place and in a different format ;) (I don't assume
code examples in docs can break any licenses though..)
David,
Can you have a look at http://www.eclipse.org/emf/. It has an XMIReader
and is CPL, but I don't have a clue what the code does in graph, Even
though it is an eclipse plugin, the design could be that good that it is
usable..
Mvgr,
Martin
On Wed, 2003-02-05 at 20:11, David Dixon-Peugh
On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Steve Downey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Would it be possible to take an approach analagous to Ant's optional
tasks?
I'm pretty sure there is no optional task that depends on an LGPLed
library.
That is, distribute the code that _uses_ the API, but not distribute
the library
handwritten code generators for them.
I hadn't noticed before this that graph had anything to do with it.
- Original Message -
From: Stefan Bodewig [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: [Graph2] nsUML license problem
On Thu, 6 Feb 2003
Here is my option :
See my proposal reverse dependency strategy just sent to general.
This way we can leave the dependency and just need to refactor to have
an interface, where we can implement it some other cvs repo than the
apache one (maybe a werken repo?)
Mvgr,
Martin
On Wed, 2003-02-05 at
Hey all,
If you follow the community list, it sounds like the
board is coming down on libraries that distribute or
link to LGPL software. Unfortunately, graph2 is one
of those libraries, by way of the nsUML license:
http://nsuml.sourceforge.net
The choices seem to be:
1) Convince nsUML to
On Wed, 2003-02-05 at 12:32, Morgan Delagrange wrote:
Hey all,
If you follow the community list, it sounds like the
board is coming down on libraries that distribute or
link to LGPL software. Unfortunately, graph2 is one
of those libraries, by way of the nsUML license:
On Wed, 2003-02-05 at 14:11, David Dixon-Peugh wrote:
The nsUML stuff isn't central to the Graph package.
Indeed it might be better off if it isn't included
in the Jars. I can see taking some of the domain
packages and distributing them separately.
(Its doubtful that many people need to
On 5 Feb 2003, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On Wed, 2003-02-05 at 14:11, David Dixon-Peugh wrote:
The nsUML stuff isn't central to the Graph package.
Indeed it might be better off if it isn't included
in the Jars. I can see taking some of the domain
packages and distributing them
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is a third option:
3) Remove graph2 from commons.
I wouldn't presume to do that on my own recognizance,
but if all the graph2 developers decided to go that
way, that would be fine. Seems like overkill for the
sake of two classes, but I have no idea how
Morgan Delagrange [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 06/02/2003 11:28:55 AM:
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is a third option:
3) Remove graph2 from commons.
I wouldn't presume to do that on my own recognizance,
but if all the graph2 developers decided to go that
way, that would be
12 matches
Mail list logo
