On Jul 23, 2012, at 11:56 AM, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi Andrea,
On Jul 23, 2012, at 10:42 AM, Andrea Caracciolo wrote:
Hi Jannik,
As Fabrizio said, Mircea (and I) is (are) already working at building such a repository.
We would like to share MSE files as a complement to the cited qualitias corpus.
We are also thinking to distribute moose images with a preloaded MSE files.
We should discuss about this point particularly. Where are you with your investigations
I have recently written a simple script which is able to load a given MSE file into a
specified moose image, and save everything as a new image.
Sharing such images would save a lot of time to the end-user and is another little step to
having consistent and reproducible analysis results.
question: how fast is the moose release cycle ?
Some questions:
- is there any reason to support vervainJ instead of InFamix ? Would it make sense to
support both ?
This is a long discussion. I know that VerveinJ works fine. It is open-soure and
well-maintained.
Maybe Nicolas Anquetil has already done a comparison between the two importers.
- would anybody be interested in sharing the
results of their analyses ? which features are to be expected from such a service ?
For sure, in experimental study, we need to compare different approaches.
When we have coherent data and reproducible experimentation, it is clearly better
We already have a couple of ideas and we think it would be interesting to explore such an
option.
Having all contributed results in a common format would benefit information sharing and
data comparison.
Does anybody have any idea about any possible usage of such kind of information ?
Is there any existing data format which could be used to specify these data (keeping a
link to the MSE model entities) ?
Jannik
Andrea
_____________________________
Andrea Caracciolo -- caracciolo(a)iam.unibe.ch
Software Composition Group
University of Bern
On Jul 21, 2012, at 7:29 PM, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi guys,
Each time we need to do case studies in Moose, we have to select the software
application, in a certain version and probably without all the source code needed. This
results on evaluations that are probably not reproducible.
I think that we need to unify our efforts and share the mse files of our models. With
that, it will be not necessary to generate a FAMIX model each time we need one.
For now, I begun to generate the model from the Qualitas Corpus 'e'
(
http://qualitascorpus.com/). There are 486 multiple versions of multiple Java systems.
The mse files are really big (more than 650Mo for Eclipse_SDK3.7). I tried to load the
biggest one in Moose, and it loads ! I just needed to attribute 2Gb of memory in the
info.plist file of Moose 4.6.
I propose to put the files on a server. For all the tar.bz2 files, I need 3.65Gb.
Now, we lack ok at least two pieces of information : (i) the version of verveineJ used
for the extraction. For now, VerveineJ has no version (I took the latest one). (ii) the
version(s) of Moose that can load the file. I tried one mse file with Moose4.6.
We also need a server that can accept all the files.
Any suggestion ?
Jannik
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
---
Jannik Laval
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev