I understand while reading this forum that there are different repositories currently under development:
- git based repository, where Phil is currently implementing an integration with Archi
- database based repository, where Herve is currently implementing a similar functionality using the relational database as a backend.
I am wondering what the differences of two solutions are. I guess it is related to the online and offline working capabilities as well as level of granularity of versioning of concepts in the model, maybe the way of sharing concepts or managing evolution and sharing of models.
Are you see them as competing solutions or as complementary solutions?
Is there a comparison of the two solutions? Are there more repository solutions available or under development?
Thanks in advance.
the git-based repository & collaboration plugin is something initiated by J-B Sarrodie and we are working on it together. As it uses git it will support versioning, branches, off-line and sharing. Herve's work is his own initiative and based on a DB.
> Are you see them as competing solutions or as complementary solutions?
As this is all about open source, there is no competition - simply open source solutions provided by different developers. Indeed, I'm sure there are many Archi extensions and plugins out there, of which I am unaware. Some may even be closed source.
> Is there a comparison of the two solutions?
Probably best to compare the blurb on the two GitHub websites.
> Are there more repository solutions available or under development?
Unless they are advertised somewhere, I don't know
I fully agree with Phil. The plugins do not compete, they just are two differents approachs with their pros and cons.
The fact that several plugins exist (and not only the repository ones) just demonstrate that the Archi community is quite active :D
My 5 euro cent thinking is if you working in a software development shop or other work where you already is using Git, then J-B & Phils aproach is simpel to start with, but as for me, more infrastructure company, the Rdb solution is simpler as we have lot of rdb people to help me.
Both are trying to solve different issues and from different angles.
Phil and I goal is to provide a simple and straightforward way to share and collaborate on a model. You don't even need a new server because you can use SaaS solution like github or bitbucket. I also wanted a way to have people collaborate on model without providing them write access (which is the basis of opensource collaboration through github) and a way to work offline (without network access to the server).
Another important feature offered through the git based solution is that a model update can trigger actions. This means that it is really (yes, really easy) to update an HTML export after each update. It is also really easy to export your model data into a relational or graph (or whatever you want) database. The goal is really to make you model data accessible wherever needed (a boundaryless information flow as would say The Open Group).
At some point It could even be possible for Phil and I to provide a SaaS solution tuned and customize to host your models with exciting features.