From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,39e272d357c68416
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Samuel T. Harris" <sam_harris@hso.link.com>
Subject: Re: Is Apex dead as an environment for Ada & Java?
Date: 1999/11/29
Message-ID: <3842C457.CBC87C2@hso.link.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 554507628
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <11f733ec.57d88b68@usw-ex0107-042.remarq.com>
 <384127A5.61431A14@dowie-cs.demon.co.uk>
 <0a0133f8.3baf10c0@usw-ex0101-001.remarq.com> <81s370$7am$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <0a0133f8.7900d89e@usw-ex0102-015.remarq.com>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Raytheon Scientific & Technical Services
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-11-29T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

jim_snead wrote:
> 
> In article <81s370$7am$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, mike_zebrowski@my-deja.com
> wrote:
> > Apex subsystems help prevent circular references.
> > Ada95 naming coventions do not.
> > Mike Zebrowski
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
> 
> Here is an approach to prevent circular dependencies
> which is enforcable by using an Ada 95 compiler.
> 
> <snip>

I've used Apex since its inception and its R1000 predecessors
for years before that. I have found from experience that subsystem
design is more about the flow of work than about the organization
of code.

While the tips given by Jim Snead are valuable, the concerns
they address are not my primary concerns when I'm allocation
subsystems to support a project. The organization the teams
is primary. How many developers are involved? How are the
developers partitioned into teams? What manager layers
are involved in inter-team coordination? What are the logistics
involved in the scheduling of each team's releases?

As many have alluded to, Apex is overkill for a small project.
Apex shines for huge projects. And once in place in an organization
to support a single huge project, then it is already available
for the small ones as well.

I'd also like to add some technical attributes I've come to
appreciate over the years.

1. The configuration management information resides in the
subsystem. Each view uses it to generate its content. Since
the subsystem and views can have different physical storage
locations, I can spread by stuff around and limit my exposure
to a disk crash.

2. Each subsystem is a self-contained configuration management
area. I don't not have to be dependent on one single monolithic
CM engine. This also limits my exposure to CM related problems.

3. The clear separation between subsystems provides important
configuration management controls and enforces a minimal level
of discipline upon developers. I also like the use of histories
instead of free-for-all branching supported by other tools.
I can branch in Apex with histories, it just takes more work,
and therefore more thought on just what exactly I need to do.

As a parting thought, I do really miss that Ada command-line
environment on the old R1000's.

-- 
Samuel T. Harris, Principal Engineer
Raytheon, Scientific and Technical Systems
"If you can make it, We can fake it!"