From: Liam M. <lm...@wp...> - 2004-11-23 07:57:52
|
The formatting for the trackers on sourceforge... in a word... sucks. As you guys noticed with my first use case submission, the HTML is escaped, and as such isn't parsed. Well, they also don't convert spaces into , so I'm really unsure as to how to format anything. I vote for choosing a new method for storing use cases, as the current system... well, again, it sucks. Here are two suggestions for replacements- PLEASE either vote for one of these or come up with an alternative suggestion (OR vote for keeping the SourceForge tracker). One possible suggestion... what we did for our SoftEng project in E Term was to write the use cases in HTML, and then check them in to CVS. That way, if we made changes, we could always run a diff, and we also got nice formatting whenever we wanted to show the use cases to people. (How exactly should we be showing use cases to our 'audience'?) This would favor HTML coded either by hand or by a really basic editor- anything created in Dreamweaver or FrontPage would probably be too difficult to diff. Another suggestion is to put them in the "Docs" section in SourceForge. We get the formatting (still in HTML), and it makes it MUCH easier for visitors to view them by visiting our site. (It also allows us to be much lazier by not having to take them out of CVS and put them on our website.) The downside of this compared to the above option is that diffs are harder, but we already have a system for marking changes in our Docs section anyway (comments at the top of the document). It really doesn't matter whether you edit the HTML by hand or not in this case- all that should be required is that it's suitable for future changes (it shouldn't be so obscure that you can't edit it any more). Neither of these suggestions have features I'd like such as automatic feature matrix generation, assignment of ownership, etc... but then again, the SourceForge tracker didn't really have automatic feature matrix generation either, and we can easily say "Use Case X, Owned by Person Y" in HTML. Here's my complete "Add Object to Object Bench" use case, in all its formatted glory. This is the only place you can see it at the moment. Liam -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [ ebob-Use Cases-1071495 ] Add Object to Object Bench (Complete) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 23:34:59 -0800 From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> To: no...@so... Use Cases item #1071495, was opened at 2004-11-23 02:31 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by imotic You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=697946&aid=1071495&group_id=123169 Category: Complete Group: None Status: Open Priority: 9 Submitted By: Liam Morley (imotic) Assigned to: Liam Morley (imotic) Summary: Add Object to Object Bench (Complete) Initial Comment: Create New Instance Primary Actor: Developer 1. Developer selects Add To Object Bench Wizard from one of the following locations: - A button on the object bench itself - The "New..." Wizard selection - The context menu for .java files and public Java classes - Developer can drag-and-drop a public Java class or .java file to the Object Bench If a .java file is selected, it is assumed that the public class within that file is to be used. 2. Developer fills out the name for the instance, and selects a class from the workbench. 3. System validates the name and class (while the Developer types) to make sure that: - The name is a legal java variable identifier - The name hasn't already been selected by an object currently on the Bench - The class is either in the classpath or on the workbench EXTENSIONS: 3a. The only constructor for this class is a default no-argument constructor: .1 System displays only the "Finish" action as enabled, and notifies Developer that this is the case. .2 Developer selects "Finish" and advances to step 9. 3b. There is no default no-argument constructor available for this class: .1 System displays only the "Next" action as enabled. .2 Developer selects "Next" and advances to step 4. 3c. There is both a no-argument constructor as well as one other constructor available for this class: .1 System displays both "Next" and "Finish" as enabled. .2 Developer selects either "Next" or "Finish" and advances to either step 4 or step 9, respectively. 4. Developer selects "Next". 5. Developer selects a constructor. 6. System displays a list of arguments. 7. Developer specifies the parameters. Parameters can be specified either as literals, in-place objects, or references to objects currently on the Object Bench (referenced by name). 8. Developer selects "Finish". 9. System creates the object using the supplied constructor and arguments and adds it to the Object Bench. If the Object Bench view is not already visible, the System makes it visible. EXTENSIONS: 9a. The System has an unrecoverable error that prevents an object from being constructed from this class: .1 System displays message indicating this, and presents "Cancel" action. .2 Developer cancels wizard. 9b. The System has an error which prevents an object from being constructed using the supplied arguments: .1 System displays message indicating this, and presents both "Cancel" and "Back" options. 9b1a. Developer cancels wizard. 9b2a. Developer selects "Back" and returns to step 6. 9c. The System has an error which prevents an object from being constructed using the supplied constructor: .1 System displays message indicating this, and presents both "Cancel" and "Back" options. 9c1a. Developer cancels wizard. 9c2a. Developer selects "Back" and returns to step 5; the previously chosen constructor is removed from the list of possibilities. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Liam Morley (imotic) Date: 2004-11-23 02:34 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=150393 OPEN ISSUES: 1. Currently, any class from the workbench (meaning, any class from any open java project) or the classpath can be added to the Object Bench. This could be a potential problem, as two classes with the same fully qualified name can exist in separate projects. (A real world example is having two different branches of the same source code checked out into two separate projects.) It currently hasn't been decided as to how this will be dealt with, or where the responsibilities lie. This may be changed later. 2. It's currently uncertain whether or not objects will be represented by Eclipse's internal type structure (see: IType in the JDT Javadoc). There are potential issues concerning the changing of the class definition of an object that is currently attached to the Object Bench. More research is necessary. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=697946&aid=1071495&group_id=123169 |