[Neo] Fwd: Feedback request

Mattias Persson mattias at neotechnology.com
Wed Apr 21 12:51:05 CEST 2010

Forgot to CC the mailing list

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mattias Persson <mattias at neotechnology.com>
Date: 2010/4/21
Subject: Re: Feedback request
To: Niels Hoogeveen <pd_aficionado at hotmail.com>
Cc: Neo Devteam <devteam at neotechnology.com>

I'd say go for it, but you could bump the version (in pom.xml) to
0.9-SNAPSHOT before committing so that it doesn't break for people doing an
mvn -U. And then when doing changes in meta-model-import also bump its

It's great to see you making these changes and additions!

Some things I saw and don't totally agree with :)

   - The names MetaModelPropertyType, MetaModelRelationshipType. It sounds
   to me that they only describe the type of property/relationship... f.ex.
   that it's a String or integer... or that the relationship type is "KNOWS".
   So I'd vote to name them MetaModelProperty/MetaModelRelationship. (the same
   goes for the MetaModel???Restri
   - Also you changed some (not all) LOOKUP_??? contants to
   ..._RELATIONSHIPTYPE_... so maybe change those back to ..._RELATIONSHIP_...
   - I see that "restrictables" have no common super interface and that the
   restrictables for property/relationship are close to identical. Make a
   super-interface for those and you could remove a lot of code from their
   - The same goes for PropertyRange/RelationshipTypeRange (which I think
   should be called RelationshipRange btw); they are almost identical and it
   hurts my eyes to see so much duplicated code, if you don't mind my saying
   so. So if you unify the ???Range classes (with a super-class) and makes the
   super-interface of the restrictables have a generic parameter T extends
   TheSuperClassForRanges you'd get so much for free (less/cleaner code,
   maintainability, etc)!

I haven't looked at all your changes/additions, but I feel it's better to
iterate over it when/if issues arise.

Nice work

2010/4/20 Niels Hoogeveen <pd_aficionado at hotmail.com>

 Hi Mattias,
> I made most of the changes we discussed on the mailing list. Although I
> have been granted access right to push these changes to SVN, I feel it is
> better to check with you first before doing so.
> Attached you will find the three jar files created by the maven built with
> classes, sources and javadocs. Of course we can discuss matters on the
> mailing list.
> The MetaModelMetaClasses are not yet part of the modifications I made, but
> since they are pretty much orthogonal, I can add those at a later stage.
> For now the modifications include:
>    - Renaming of "name" property, including a unique index on that
>    property
>    - Split of MetaModelProperty into MetaModelPropertyType and
>    MetaModelRelationshipType.
>    - InstanceRange on and instance cardinality on MetaModelClass
>    - MetaModelPropertyTypes for MetaModelRelationshipTypes
> Since these modifications are breaking changes, I'd like to have confirmed
> these changes are good (at least with respect to interface definitions),
> before modifying meta-model-import to use these changed interfaces.
> Niels Hoogeveen
> ------------------------------
> New Windows 7: Simplify what you do everyday. Find the right PC for you.<http://windows.microsoft.com/shop>

Mattias Persson, [mattias at neotechnology.com]
Hacker, Neo Technology

Mattias Persson, [mattias at neotechnology.com]
Hacker, Neo Technology

More information about the User mailing list