Issue 15608: MOF 2 should merge UML 2 (merged) as opposed to Kernel (mof2core-rtf) Source: Adaptive (Mr. Pete Rivett, pete.rivett(at)adaptive.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: MOF 2 should merge UML 2 (merged) as opposed to Kernel and use the automated constraints from UML 2.4 production. Since UML2 now has a normative merged metamodel it makes sense to reference this – especially since Kernel will be disappearing at UML 2.5. The UML 2.4 team has produced a more complete set of executable constraints for valid MOF 2.4 metamodels which should be incorporated. Resolution: This is part of a larger effort to do the final steps of MOF – UML harmonization. Change the MOF Model to merge UML (from 2.5) instead of UML::Kernel. Revise the whole MOF Core specification document to change any remaining references to Basic, Infrastructure, Kernel, etc. to the corresponding references based on UML 2.5. This effort includes replacement of diagrams where necessary Revised Text: see pages 23 - 36 of ptc/2014-09-35for details Actions taken: September 21, 2010: received issue April 6, 2015: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== ubject: New issue for MOF 2 Core RTF Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 06:26:38 -0700 X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: New issue for MOF 2 Core RTF Thread-Index: ActZjr3kmVzc0I0aQya+BqPvmgRwJQ== From: "Pete Rivett" To: MOF 2 should merge UML 2 (merged) as opposed to Kernel and use the automated constraints from UML 2.4 production. Since UML2 now has a normative merged metamodel it makes sense to reference this . especially since Kernel will be disappearing at UML 2.5. The UML 2.4 team has produced a more complete set of executable constraints for valid MOF 2.4 metamodels which should be incorporated. -- Pete Rivett (pete.rivett@adaptive.com) CTO, Adaptive Inc 65 Enterprise, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 cell: +1 949 338 3794 Follow me on Twitter @rivettp or http://twitter.com/rivettp