Re: [Antbear-devel] Usecase discussion

[Thorsten Schemm]

Hi Daniel,
here comes just an addition to the answers you got in the other mail.
> 
> My first impression is that it is clear and easy to
> understand, and the concept is fairly simple. You want
> a server to be either a Supporter, Master, or both.
> The idea of a Supporter (eg. #2) is that it provides
> data to a Master (eg. #1). This Master #1 can also act
> as a Supporter to another Master, or even act as a
> Supporter to #2. The relationship between Masters and
> Servers is many-to-many. Is my understanding correct
> so far?
It is fine with me that a MASTER can act as a SUPPORTER to another
MASTER, but it does not have to be.  So if it makes things more easy we
could stick with the idea of a tree where a MASTER is the root and it
does not have any childs but leafs that are SUPPORTERs. Whatever suits
you best I would say.

> 
> I guess each oval indicates a function. If so, why is
> there 'extends' keyword on some of the arrows joining
> the ovals? Is this indicating that each function will
> be in its own separate class?

I would not make any conclusions from the use-cases to the number of
classes and/or functions yet.  Let's see what activities each use-case
would need.  
My planned order would be use-cases, an activity diagram on each
use-case and finally define the classes and methods by setting up the
class-diagrams.  This probably won't take much time, so we can start
coding soon I would say.
About the 'extends' keyword:  What I was trying to indicate by using it
was that extending use-cases are sort of optional since they depend on
the antbear's configuration parameters.  I hope that is ok in UML terms,
because I tend to mess a few things up with those diagrams 8) .

- Thorsten