New open source UML tool including Ada support

New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Martin]

Don't know why Aonix haven't bothered to post here but they've opened
up their UML tool "Ameos" as "OpenAmeos" http://www.aonix.com/pr_06.20.07.html

Haven't spent more than 5 minutes looking at it yet but it seems to
offer both forward source code generation and reverse into UML support
for both Ada95 and what looks like support for "Ravenscar" Ada95.

Cheers
-- Martin

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Markus E Leypold]

> Don't know why Aonix haven't bothered to post here but they've opened

Perhaps because the source is not available yet? (Which raises the
question under which license the user gets the executable at the
moment: Not the modfied LGPL under which everything will be available
later, because the downloader is at the moment not able to comply to
this (future) license, given that he doesn't have the source to
comply.)

> up their UML tool "Ameos" as "OpenAmeos" http://www.aonix.com/pr_06.20.07.html

Regards -- Markus

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Jean-Pierre Rosen]

Markus E Leypold a �crit :
> 
>> Don't know why Aonix haven't bothered to post here but they've opened
> 
> Perhaps because the source is not available yet? (Which raises the
> question under which license the user gets the executable at the
> moment: Not the modfied LGPL under which everything will be available
> later, because the downloader is at the moment not able to comply to
> this (future) license, given that he doesn't have the source to
> comply.)
> 
This is known as the Hibachi project, and has been announced (under this 
name) in this newsgroup and at the Ada-Europe conference in Geneva.

Note: Hibachi is a traditional Japanese heating device. It is also the 
anagram of a famous person...

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------
            J-P. Rosen (rosen@adalog.fr)
Visit Adalog's web site at http://www.adalog.fr

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Martin]

On 10 Jul, 16:53, Jean-Pierre Rosen <r...@adalog.fr> wrote:
[snip]
> This is known as the Hibachi project, and has been announced (under this
> name) in this newsgroup and at the Ada-Europe conference in Geneva.
>
> Note: Hibachi is a traditional Japanese heating device. It is also the
> anagram of a famous person...

No! Hibachi is the Eclipse add-on to support Ada source code writing/
building/debugging. This is a UML diagramming tool which can
autogenerate code (in C++, Java and, of course,  Ada - possibly
others).

Cheers
-- Martin

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Martin]

On 10 Jul, 14:10, Markus E Leypold
<development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVET...@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> wrote:
> > Don't know why Aonix haven't bothered to post here but they've opened
>
> Perhaps because the source is not available yet? (Which raises the
> question under which license the user gets the executable at the
> moment: Not the modfied LGPL under which everything will be available
> later, because the downloader is at the moment not able to comply to
> this (future) license, given that he doesn't have the source to
> comply.)

Not too bothered if the source is available just now or not - it's
unlikely to be in Ada anyway! But the free (as in beer) availablity of
a UML tool which also supports Ada, now /that's/ interesting! :-)

Cheers
-- Martin

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Markus E Leypold]

> On 10 Jul, 14:10, Markus E Leypold
> <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVET...@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> wrote:
>> > Don't know why Aonix haven't bothered to post here but they've opened
>>
>> Perhaps because the source is not available yet? (Which raises the
>> question under which license the user gets the executable at the
>> moment: Not the modfied LGPL under which everything will be available
>> later, because the downloader is at the moment not able to comply to
>> this (future) license, given that he doesn't have the source to
>> comply.)
>
> Not too bothered if the source is available just now or not - it's
> unlikely to be in Ada anyway! But the free (as in beer) availablity of
> a UML tool which also supports Ada, now /that's/ interesting! :-)

Quite right. I'm only trolling on the license situation since I'm
probably already infamous for my destructive relationship to
licensing. The problem simply is, that the page AFAIS doesn't state a
license (so I can do everything with the tool I want? -- strange) and
that we can't assume you get the tool under *GPL since you can't give
it to others under that circumstances w/o source.

I also fear (since the tool you gat is an exe file) that it won't be
easily portable to Unix (but this is another problem).

Regards -- Markus

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Georg Bauhaus]

On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 19:08 +0200, Markus E Leypold wrote:
> 
> >
> I also fear (since the tool you gat is an exe file) that it won't be
> easily portable to Unix (but this is another problem).

I think Ameos has a few ideas in common with
Software through Pictures (TM), a venerable tool.
" Since 1985 we have been developing StP consistently and adapting our
products to the latest technologies and requirements. Today structured
methods (StP/SE) like Structure Analysis and Structured Design are
supported, as well as the Unified Modeling Language (StP/UML) in the
OO  range."

There are a few snapshots showing Motif interfaces.

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Markus E Leypold]

> On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 19:08 +0200, Markus E Leypold wrote:
>> 
>> >
>> I also fear (since the tool you gat is an exe file) that it won't be
>> easily portable to Unix (but this is another problem).

Actually I take that back. "Other Platforms will follow soon". On the
other side I've been waiting for some open sourcing announcements to
become true now for more than 5 years. So I believe it when it
happens.



> I think Ameos has a few ideas in common with
> Software through Pictures (TM), a venerable tool.
> " Since 1985 we have been developing StP consistently and adapting our
> products to the latest technologies and requirements. Today structured
> methods (StP/SE) like Structure Analysis and Structured Design are
> supported, as well as the Unified Modeling Language (StP/UML) in the
> OO  range."

>
> There are a few snapshots showing Motif interfaces.

Of STP?

Regards -- markus

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Simon Wright]

Markus E Leypold <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> writes:

> Quite right. I'm only trolling on the license situation since I'm
> probably already infamous for my destructive relationship to
> licensing. The problem simply is, that the page AFAIS doesn't state
> a license (so I can do everything with the tool I want? -- strange)
> and that we can't assume you get the tool under *GPL since you can't
> give it to others under that circumstances w/o source.

Reading the terms of use it's not obvious what meaning 'open source'
has!

Of course, since they say "You may not decompile, reverse engineer or
otherwise attempt to discover the source code of the software."  it's
possible that the terms of use are still draft ..

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Markus E Leypold]

> Markus E Leypold <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> writes:
>
>> Quite right. I'm only trolling on the license situation since I'm
>> probably already infamous for my destructive relationship to
>> licensing. The problem simply is, that the page AFAIS doesn't state
>> a license (so I can do everything with the tool I want? -- strange)
>> and that we can't assume you get the tool under *GPL since you can't
>> give it to others under that circumstances w/o source.
>
> Reading the terms of use it's not obvious what meaning 'open source'
> has!
>
> Of course, since they say "You may not decompile, reverse engineer or
> otherwise attempt to discover the source code of the software."  it's
> possible that the terms of use are still draft ..

Oh, I see. In _Terms of Use_. I wouldn't have looked there for the
license, actually. Somewhere else at the site it's stated, it _will_
be available under amodified LGPL. The press release is a bit early,
'cause it says "Under the terms of the Ameos open source agreement, a
\u201cclean\u201d open source version of Ameos, called OpenAmeos, has
been created to ensure that anyone installing a new version of Ameos
will be able to use it freely without encumbrances of any other source
contributions. This version is freely downloadable at
http://www.openameos.org." -- which obviously isn't happening yet.

So it's not open source yet, and as I said, I'll believe it when it
happens. Not to stab the gift horse, but wasn't the last "free"
give-away from AONIX the "you now pay only for support" campaign,
which turned out to mean: "if you already bought something very
expensive". Technically right, but the "as it is with Linux" spin was
completely off the mark.

(Am I resentful? Perhaps. Still I think, the best marketing is if one
doesn't have to spin it to an extent that will simply disappoint
anyone who is really trying to open the box: Some people resent being
bullshitted :-), not very much, but I won't forget it either).

So AONIX and ScopeSET: Really, really beautiful if all this will
become true: I'm also speaking as an ex-teacher -- we've been missing
tools like this sorely also and especially in teaching. The press
release, though is a bit early: I won't count my chickens before
they're hatched.

Regards -- Markus

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Martin]

On Jul 10, 6:08 pm, Markus E Leypold
<development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVET...@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> wrote:
[snip]
> licensing. The problem simply is, that the page AFAIS doesn't state a
> license (so I can do everything with the tool I want? -- strange) and
> that we can't assume you get the tool under *GPL since you can't give
> it to others under that circumstances w/o source.

Well the Aonix press release states:

         "Under the new open source policy, Ameos is available
          under terms based on the GNU Lesser General Public
          License (LGPL) as OpenAmeos."

Which sounds promising to me! :-)

Cheers
-- Martin

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Markus E Leypold]

> On Jul 10, 6:08 pm, Markus E Leypold
> <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVET...@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> wrote:
> [snip]
>> licensing. The problem simply is, that the page AFAIS doesn't state a
>> license (so I can do everything with the tool I want? -- strange) and
>> that we can't assume you get the tool under *GPL since you can't give
>> it to others under that circumstances w/o source.
>
> Well the Aonix press release states:
>
>          "Under the new open source policy, Ameos is available
>           under terms based on the GNU Lesser General Public
>           License (LGPL) as OpenAmeos."
>
> Which sounds promising to me! :-)

Yes, _promising_. But at the moment there is only an executable, no
source. And I have been wondering about the license this executable is
under, since anybody getting it, can't resditribute it under the
LGPL/modified-whatever, because, well he hasn't gotten the source (and
probably not not LGPL license too, because that would guarantee him
the source).

Murky legal questions are lurking there in the dark.

I wonder why people do things like this, instead of just going public
when the source IS there. Or getting the press release right (saying
the're now free-as-beer but intent to go open).

As I interpret the terms of use: This version, presently available is
free-as-in-beer. What will happen in future, we will have to see and
the press release is at least 2 weeks early: "is available" should
better read "will be available" -- and I notice they give no deadline
for that either.

(Does anybody remember OpenDOS, the former DR-DOS: Should have become
available as open source, first they made a binary release, there even
was some (non-compiling) source code available for a very limited time
under a not-so-open license. Said they needed to clean up. And they
cleaned and cleaned and after a number of months (more than 12, I
remember), they (I think it even was Caldera) decided that OpenDOS was
an asset and they decide not to open it up. Wow. Cool publicity
stunt. Not that I say that is what Aonix intends, but after more than
2 decades in the industry I believe only in deeds rather than
promises.)

Regards -- Markus

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[dave.wood]

On Jul 10, 3:35 pm, Markus E Leypold
<development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVET...@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> wrote:
> > On Jul 10, 6:08 pm, Markus E Leypold
> > <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVET...@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> wrote:
>
> > Well the Aonix press release states:
>
> >          "Under the new open source policy, Ameos is available
> >           under terms based on the GNU Lesser General Public
> >           License (LGPL) as OpenAmeos."
>
> > Which sounds promising to me! :-)
>
> Yes, _promising_. But at the moment there is only an executable, no
> source. And I have been wondering about the license this executable is
> under, since anybody getting it, can't resditribute it under the
> LGPL/modified-whatever, because, well he hasn't gotten the source (and
> probably not not LGPL license too, because that would guarantee him
> the source).
>
> Murky legal questions are lurking there in the dark.

It's not a big mystery unless people want to create one. We are simply
making the sources publicly available under terms based on LGPL.

>
> I wonder why people do things like this, instead of just going public
> when the source IS there. Or getting the press release right (saying
> the're now free-as-beer but intent to go open).

Are we evil or are we incompetent? One of the mysteries of life...

>
> As I interpret the terms of use: This version, presently available is
> free-as-in-beer. What will happen in future, we will have to see and
> the press release is at least 2 weeks early: "is available" should
> better read "will be available" -- and I notice they give no deadline
> for that either.

We decided to put Ameos into open source, and we made certain sources
available IMMEDIATELY to existing Ameos users on an as-needed basis.
As such "is available" is not inaccurate. We also went ahead and
announced the open sourcing so other people would know about it. I
don't want to debate press release semantics, but IMO this one is
fine.

Why the delay? The reality is that a couple components of the sources
need to be "cleansed" of encumbrances before the sources can be put on
the web site for general availability. To be distinquished, this
cleansed version is called OpenAmeos.

This should happen within a few weeks. Unless you happened to have a
burning need for Ameos sources RIGHT NOW, I wouldn't expect this
interim period to be too painful for anybody. As you can see, the
executable is provided for anyone with actual work needing to be done,
and is indeed free as beer and will make you almost as happy as
drinking free beer.

>
> (Does anybody remember OpenDOS, the former DR-DOS: Should have become
> available as open source, first they made a binary release, there even
> was some (non-compiling) source code available for a very limited time
> under a not-so-open license. Said they needed to clean up. And they
> cleaned and cleaned and after a number of months (more than 12, I
> remember), they (I think it even was Caldera) decided that OpenDOS was
> an asset and they decide not to open it up. Wow. Cool publicity
> stunt. Not that I say that is what Aonix intends, but after more than
> 2 decades in the industry I believe only in deeds rather than
> promises.)

Quite frankly, I would not waste my time on such nonsense, but after
two (and a half) decades in the industry, such cynicism doesn't
surprise me. :)

The OpenAmeos sources and LGPL license agreement will appear "soon" on
the OpenAmeos.org web site. Please enjoy your free software, and free
sources, which follow many, many years of hard work by many talented
engineers.

Regards,

Dave Wood
VP Marketing
Aonix

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Markus E Leypold]

> On Jul 10, 3:35 pm, Markus E Leypold
> <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVET...@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> wrote:
>> > On Jul 10, 6:08 pm, Markus E Leypold
>> > <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVET...@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> wrote:
>>
>> > Well the Aonix press release states:
>>
>> >          "Under the new open source policy, Ameos is available
>> >           under terms based on the GNU Lesser General Public
>> >           License (LGPL) as OpenAmeos."
>>
>> > Which sounds promising to me! :-)
>>
>> Yes, _promising_. But at the moment there is only an executable, no
>> source. And I have been wondering about the license this executable is
>> under, since anybody getting it, can't resditribute it under the
>> LGPL/modified-whatever, because, well he hasn't gotten the source (and
>> probably not not LGPL license too, because that would guarantee him
>> the source).
>>
>> Murky legal questions are lurking there in the dark.
>
> It's not a big mystery unless people want to create one. We are simply
> making the sources publicly available under terms based on LGPL.

So there is no GPL version available. The available excutable is
free-as-in-beer and cannot be re-distributed. That's it. For the
moment.

>> I wonder why people do things like this, instead of just going public
>> when the source IS there. Or getting the press release right (saying
>> the're now free-as-beer but intent to go open).
>
> Are we evil or are we incompetent? One of the mysteries of life...

Ask me. Can you shed some light on the grammatical tense in the press
release: It's rather clearly present tense (Ameos is available")
whereas the source release hasn't happened yet (or didn't have
happened at that time), so should actual have been future tense, don't
you think so?

Actually I think (as much as I will thank you when the code is
available) that is a good reason not to get cute now ("are we evil or
..."), when I point out the apparent disagreement between press
release and actual fact.

>> As I interpret the terms of use: This version, presently available is
>> free-as-in-beer. What will happen in future, we will have to see and
>> the press release is at least 2 weeks early: "is available" should
>> better read "will be available" -- and I notice they give no deadline
>> for that either.
>
> We decided to put Ameos into open source, and we made certain sources
> available IMMEDIATELY to existing Ameos users on an as-needed basis.

Oh, I underststand. That wasn't what the press release suggested,
though.

> As such "is available" is not inaccurate. We also went ahead and

Look, I'm not intrested in a flame war at the moment, but a "well,
that was not quite right, sorry, but we're take pains to make it
happen as already announced" would perhaps be a better strategy to
handle that than trying to spin it as if you're just right and I
didn't just read or interpret the press release right. I hate it when
people try to distort the language. The press release unfortunately
says things that haven't happened yet. We all hope they will happen,
but until then I just _postpone_ judgement (instead of refraining
from it altogether).

> announced the open sourcing so other people would know about it. I
> don't want to debate press release semantics, but IMO this one is
> fine.

No, it isn't. "will be available soon" and/or "already has been made
available to selected users" would have be the correct
phrasing. Please don't argue about that: I'd hate to have to come to
the conclusion that Aonix had a general problem with veracity
concerning press releases, see our laster encounter in this group
concerning the "free availability" of the compiler. 

> Why the delay? The reality is that a couple components of the sources
> need to be "cleansed" of encumbrances before the sources can be put on
> the web site for general availability. 

You've my absolute sympathy and understanding conerning ther problems
in cleaning up and packaging formerly proprietary source. 

Please understand that my irritation is not related to the OpenAmeos
effort in itself which I find rather commendable and a big value for
the community, but rather mor with the (unfortunately again)
problematic wording of the press release,

> To be distinquished, this
> cleansed version is called OpenAmeos.

> This should happen within a few weeks. Unless you happened to have a
> burning need for Ameos sources RIGHT NOW, I wouldn't expect this
> interim period to be too painful for anybody. 

No, I can wait, as probably can most people.

> As you can see, the executable is provided for anyone with actual
> work needing to be done, and is indeed free as beer and will make
> you almost as happy as drinking free beer.

>> (Does anybody remember OpenDOS, the former DR-DOS: Should have become
>> available as open source, first they made a binary release, there even
>> was some (non-compiling) source code available for a very limited time
>> under a not-so-open license. Said they needed to clean up. And they
>> cleaned and cleaned and after a number of months (more than 12, I
>> remember), they (I think it even was Caldera) decided that OpenDOS was
>> an asset and they decide not to open it up. Wow. Cool publicity
>> stunt. Not that I say that is what Aonix intends, but after more than
>> 2 decades in the industry I believe only in deeds rather than
>> promises.)
>
> Quite frankly, I would not waste my time on such nonsense, but after
> two (and a half) decades in the industry, such cynicism doesn't
> surprise me. :)

I hope it doesn't surprise you in the sense of "I understand fromw
which precedences it comes from" instead of "I'm not surprise
considering the number of nonsensical talkers in the industry". After
all vapour ware press releases are nothing new and even well intented
open release initiatives run into trouble when cleaning up the source
(i.e. checking other peoples rights turns up deeply entangled
components that cannot be easily removed/replaced) and giev limited
resources and -- also not uncommon -- secondary priority get
postponed, first for a finite intervall, then longer, than infinitely
and that's it.

So you will understand that I believe in a source release when I see
the source (not earlier and I don't want to speculate about
probabilities) and that I believe in viablity of the project when I
see a community of 3rd party contributors forming around it. Not
earlier. (Indeed I'm mostly interested in how and wether it
is possible to add support for other OO languages to the backend).

> The OpenAmeos sources and LGPL license agreement will appear "soon" on
> the OpenAmeos.org web site. Please enjoy your free software, and free
> sources, which follow many, many years of hard work by many talented
> engineers.

Well -- I'm really looking forward to it.

Regards -- Markus

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[dave.wood]

Markus,

I'm certainly not flaming you. Simply being light-hearted if anything.
I prefer to focus on the big picture, and the big picture is a happy
one: we have made excellent and valuable technology freely available.
Please enjoy it.

Regarding the press release, I would apologize if I felt it was
appropriate to do so. I do not. The techno was legally placed into
open source at the time of the press release (actually a few weeks
before). The only question is ease of public access. As of that time
the sources were already in the hands of people who immediately needed
it. As I've described, there is a slight delay for general public
availability because some third party IP cleansing is required. I did
not know about that at the time of the press release, but if I had I
would have gone ahead anyway because making the info available is more
important, although certainly a word or two might have been tweaked.

I should point out that my contact info is on each press release, and
anyone with questions is welcome to contact me. It would prove more
productive than speculating on minutia on comp.lang.ada because I
don't personally monitor this group.

Regards,

Dave Wood
VP Marketing
Aonix

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Markus E Leypold]

> Please enjoy it.

I will. I hope, I will.

> Regarding the press release, I would apologize if I felt it was
> appropriate to do so. I do not. The techno was legally placed into
> open source at the time of the press release (actually a few weeks
> before). The only question is ease of public access. 

OK, I understand.

> As of that time
> the sources were already in the hands of people who immediately needed
> it. As I've described, there is a slight delay for general public
> availability because some third party IP cleansing is required. I did
> not know about that at the time of the press release, but if I had I
> would have gone ahead anyway because making the info available is more
> important, although certainly a word or two might have been tweaked.

That would have been advisable. What is available now to selected
persons, is, obviously, not what will be available. A small
difference. It's slips like that that generate -- well -- suspicion.

> I should point out that my contact info is on each press release, and
> anyone with questions is welcome to contact me. It would prove more
> productive than speculating on minutia on comp.lang.ada because I
> don't personally monitor this group.

Well, public is public. The danger of press releases is, that they
will be discussed. Somewhere else, probably. You being VP of merketing
should know how that is: There is no way to unpublish information and
what you said stays said and it doesn't count what it should have
meant, just what is written.

I'm actually less interested to know NOW what will happen (that will
be seen when it comes), but more in the (contradictory) semantics of
the release. My issue is/was not what Aonix will do (only the future
will tell for sure :-), but, admittedly splitting hairs. I didn't have
any questions. Being the cynic that I am, I'll continue to split hairs
in the license soup when I find them. Actually to discourage
speculations it would have been prudent to (a) use the future tense
in the press release (we're back to quare 1 here) and (b) make the
actual license already available at the site (w/o hiding it in a
executable, that is). May I suggest that this could still be done
before the source becomes available?

Regards -- Markus

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Markus E Leypold]

> Markus,
>
> I'm certainly not flaming you. Simply being light-hearted if anything.

No, I didn't insinuate this. I only acknowledged that my insistence on
some things might have the potential to become a flame war. 

> I prefer to focus on the big picture, and the big picture is a happy
> one: we have made excellent and valuable technology freely available.

Not yet. Sorry, I have to insist: not yet. I don't have a time machine.

Regards -- Markus




> Please enjoy it.
>
> Regarding the press release, I would apologize if I felt it was
> appropriate to do so. I do not. The techno was legally placed into
> open source at the time of the press release (actually a few weeks
> before). The only question is ease of public access. As of that time
> the sources were already in the hands of people who immediately needed
> it. As I've described, there is a slight delay for general public
> availability because some third party IP cleansing is required. I did
> not know about that at the time of the press release, but if I had I
> would have gone ahead anyway because making the info available is more
> important, although certainly a word or two might have been tweaked.
>
> I should point out that my contact info is on each press release, and
> anyone with questions is welcome to contact me. It would prove more
> productive than speculating on minutia on comp.lang.ada because I
> don't personally monitor this group.
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave Wood
> VP Marketing
> Aonix

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Georg Bauhaus]

On Mon, 2007-07-16 at 17:38 -0700, dave.wood@aonix.com wrote:

> The OpenAmeos sources and LGPL license agreement will appear "soon" on
> the OpenAmeos.org web site. Please enjoy your free software, and free
> sources, which follow many, many years of hard work by many talented
> engineers.

Indeed, the software has made me see the tools again that I
once had an opportunity to evaluate (as StP/UML). I'd like to point
out that Ameos has a number of features not usually present
in UML tools. Among these are linking parts of specification
documents to parts of the model and performing model checks.

IIRC, code generation is/was based on a template mechanism (these
were updated/reworked/... some time ago).

FWIW, the license text can be read now by performing an
installation of the software.

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Markus E Leypold]

> On Mon, 2007-07-16 at 17:38 -0700, dave.wood@aonix.com wrote:
>
>> The OpenAmeos sources and LGPL license agreement will appear "soon" on
>> the OpenAmeos.org web site. Please enjoy your free software, and free
>> sources, which follow many, many years of hard work by many talented
>> engineers.
>
> Indeed, the software has made me see the tools again that I
> once had an opportunity to evaluate (as StP/UML). I'd like to point
> out that Ameos has a number of features not usually present
> in UML tools. Among these are linking parts of specification
> documents to parts of the model and performing model checks.

Cool, absolutely cool. 

Does anybody know how well specified the intermediate format is,
i.e. how difficult it would be to write backends for other languages?

> IIRC, code generation is/was based on a template mechanism (these
> were updated/reworked/... some time ago).

That sounds as if it would be easy (well, comparably to developing a
UML tool from scratch).

> FWIW, the license text can be read now by performing an
> installation of the software.

Ah good. But am I right in supposing it's at the moment a
dont-redistribute-License?

Regards -- Markus


PS: To forstall the question "why don't you just install it?": I
    haven't got the time at the moment and -- as always with me --
    it's essential that it runs with Linux: I hardly ever evaluate
    Windows-only software just out of curiosity (i.e. if there is no
    project which would profit immediately from the software).

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Georg Bauhaus]

On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 12:10 +0200, Markus E Leypold wrote:

> > FWIW, the license text can be read now by performing an
> > installation of the software.
> 
> Ah good. But am I right in supposing it's at the moment a
> dont-redistribute-License?

Saying that the license text is based on the LGPL is a good
characterization, I think.

(AFAICS they ask you not to do a few things with Ameos itself.
For example, create your own Ameos and then give it away without
ScopeSET being involved. Please, don't take this sentence as
literally describing things.)

Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Markus E Leypold]

> On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 12:10 +0200, Markus E Leypold wrote:
>
>> > FWIW, the license text can be read now by performing an
>> > installation of the software.
>> 
>> Ah good. But am I right in supposing it's at the moment a
>> dont-redistribute-License?
>
> Saying that the license text is based on the LGPL is a good
> characterization, I think.

So the license of the existing executable is already based on LGPL?
And I have to add the sources of the executable if I redistribute
it. How quaint, given that there are no sources yet.

> (AFAICS they ask you not to do a few things with Ameos itself.
> For example, create your own Ameos and then give it away without
> ScopeSET being involved. Please, don't take this sentence as
> literally describing things.)

If there is a condition in any way similar to that, that would
actually remove the 'GP' from LGPL. Because the essence of (l)GPL is
the right to redistribute _modified_ code. In case one wants to
(L)GPL-open-source one's code, one has to live with that provision, I
think. Usually others don't have the resources anyway, but the option
and the effort to fork defines the level of protection of the
user/distributor against arbitray release and support policy (and
unforseaable changes thereof) by the main developers: If things become
unbearable, the cost to fork is finite (see the Joomla/Mambo split as
an example) instead of virtually inifinite (if a fork is excluded).

I seriously hope the condition you're talking about is only a request
not really a license condition.

If the situation is really like you say, using (L)GPL to advertise for
the code would be impertinent. Would a "don't distribute modified code
on your license" even be approved by OSI? (I will have to look that up).


Regards -- Markus

PS: Unfortunately one can't see the license at the site w/o
    downloading and runnng the exe-file. Even trying to unpack the
    exe-file doesn't work for (it doesn't seem to be a "standard" self
    extracing executable). I can't (i.e. don't want to) run any
    untested software on the build reference machines now, so this
    will have to wait.