[Xastir-dev] Topic: Supported Platforms, Xastir-NG

[Curt, WE7U]

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008, Tom Russo wrote:

> I downloaded ArgoUML on my laptop (which turns out to still have a java-vm
> installed) and it worked fine.  I'm willing to toy around with it until
> somebody else expresses a strong preference for something else.  I took a look
> at Eclipse and it just seemed too much to deal with (again, unless somebody
> expresses a strong preference and makes it seem like the best choice).

Ok.  I tried the Java Web Start version, but it didn't have C++
support, so I downloaded/installed the tarball and made an alias to
start it up.  Works FB.

ArgoUML does UML 1.4.  Do we need UML 2.0 support?  It's much more
complicated.

I agree on Eclipse being a bit much for our purposes.  I like
standalone tools where possible 'cuz when something goes wrong,
there's less to muck with to find the problem.

So...  ArguUML for a preliminary UML tool.  We still have time to
switch tools.

A new SF Wiki just for new development.  One person suggested that
we put a note at the top of the start page telling what the Wiki is
for (good suggestion).  I'd also like to put links to www.xastir.org
and to the Documentation Wiki for completeness.  The rest of the
Wiki pages can be devoted to new development.  Perhaps a page
listing the development tools/choice of language, methodology, etc.

Thanks to you we've got a first cut at a requirements capture.  That
should go on a sub-page linked to the main page (main page yet to be
created, I'll try to do that shortly).

I printed your initial list out and am trying to decide what to do
next:  Go through the bugs/feature requests on SF and then through
as many e-mails as I can find for Xastir-NG/Xastir-2 from previous
discussions?

I don't know where to draw the cutoff line between "useful activity"
and "a waste of my time".  It could take a LONG time to extract all
the pertinent e-mails from the last five or more years, even longer
to read/digest them.

I'm a bit worried that we'll miss something important in the
requirements capture stage.  For that matter it'd take a while to
describe requirements for the _current_ code, plus only part of that
would be pertinent to a new design.  Probably a waste of time and
not the way to "start fresh" anyway.

Once we get a reasonable initial stab at the requirements capture,
we go on to UML?

If we find major things we forgot we add them to the list, then
easily add them to UML without having to backtrack much?

After that we _should_ be able to generate the framework in C+++
directly from the UML.  Any more steps involved?

-- 
Curt, WE7U.				archer at eskimo dot com
http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
  Lotto:  A tax on people who are bad at math. - unknown
Windows:  Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates. - WE7U.
The world DOES revolve around me:  I picked the coordinate system!"