I have +1 for overall structure but confusion between samples and clients at component level. See my comments inline.
On Aug 1, 2011, at 11:58 AM, Lahiru Gunathilake wrote: > Hi Suresh, > > On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Suresh Marru <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Guys, >> >> I am getting lost in this thread, for my own clarity I will try to >> summarize please correct if I am misinterpreting the discussion. >> >> * We will need test cases which will be bundled with the source and build >> will ensure they are build correctly. >> * We will also need samples showcasing how to use a component. We need to >> make sure these samples are also build correctly. But there were multiple >> arguments on where this samples should reside. >> >> I will mashup all the suggestions and propose the following svn structure, >> feel free to yell: >> >> $airavata/trunk/ >> - modules - this directory will have all modules (currently all of them are >> at top level itself) >> - commons - as the name implies >> > What kind of thing we are going to have here ? I doubt why this commons > directory doesn't go inside modules directory ? > >> - samples - these are top level samples with system wide use cases Alek +1 for having sample at this level which will have system integration testing scope. We can address bringing different modules up at this level to test component integration. We need to make sure samples are added/updated based on different use cases. >> suggested (demonstrating the use of multiple modules together) >> - distribution - as the name implies >> >> within each module we will have samples pertaining to that components. But >> we should not push samples too deep. I mean we will need to have: >> modules/ws-messenger >> - messagebroker >> - messagebox >> - clients - client jars will ne needed for integration. The services will >> be built as aar files, so ideally clients should not be needing any server >> jars and only client jars >> - samples - will show how to utilize the client jars and address component Samples at component level are more like client and client unit test. The idea is to show how the client code works. We should not duplicate that code. For sure we should create useful API document and client documentation for users. >> level use cases. >> - distribution >> > I am +1 for this structure ! > > Regards > Lahiru > >> >> but there should not be any samples within sub-components like >> messagebroker and message box, but only unit tests. Samples to show usage >> of messagebroker and messagebox will be at one level up in ws-messenger. >> >> Did I get it close to what you all were discussing? >> >> --Suresh >> >> >> On Jul 29, 2011, at 8:18 AM, Lahiru Gunathilake wrote: >> >>> Hi Alek, >>> >>> I am +1 for having a complete end to end sample which utilize messagebox >> and >>> broker together (right now I didn't see any samples like that). >>> >>> Lahiru >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 7:54 AM, Aleksander Slominski <[email protected] >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Lot of samll smamples are just demonstrating module and use of its API. >>>> >>>> I definitely see the need for samples (or use cases) module that has >> code >>>> demonstrating use of multiple modules. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Alek >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Lahiru Gunathilake <[email protected] >>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Lahiru Gunathilake <[email protected] >>>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> How about having like this, >>>>>> >>>>>> <parent directory or distribution> >>>>>> samples >>>>>> - msgBox >>>>>> - sample name >>>>>> >>>>>> - msgBroker >>>>>> - sample name >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Or we can simply keep the sample name which make sense for users, I do >>>> not >>>>> think there is a hard requirement of having these under module names. >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> Lahiru >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> this way I do not think users will get confuse, I think this is >> cleaner >>>>>> compare to keep code, tests and samples in a module. Even though we >> can >>>>>> define sample based on the module (ex:samples for msgBroker and >> msgBox) >>>>>> there can be samples which we cannot put in to particular module >> (there >>>>> can >>>>>> be samples which consume number of modules) in that case putting >>>> samples >>>>> in >>>>>> to a module is not correct as per my understanding. >>>>>> >>>>>> so my argument is samples are not directly belong to a module and we >>>> need >>>>>> to separate it out from msgBroker and msgBox code. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Lahiru >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Aleksander Slominski < >>>> [email protected] >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Will it not be a bit confusing to have samples for different >>>> components >>>>>>> int >>>>>>> one place? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Alek >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Lahiru Gunathilake < >>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Thilina, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes if we put it in to a separate module or to distribution we can >>>>> build >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> samples and but it in to bin directory of each sample and ship the >>>>> jars >>>>>>>> too. >>>>>>>> This will be useful if some user wants the jars and want to run it >>>>>>> without >>>>>>>> using ant. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>> Lahiru >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Thilina Gunarathne < >>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> How about a separate samples module? Also we need to make sure >>>>>>> samples >>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>> part of the build, so that they won't be broken (at least no >>>> compile >>>>>>>>> errors).. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>> Thilina >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Lahiru Gunathilake < >>>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Hi Alek, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am +1 to compile the samples and put the jar in to a lib >>>>> directory >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>> each sample, at that point we can get to know during the build >>>>> time >>>>>>>>> weather >>>>>>>>>> there are issue in samples (But in practical case people will >>>> not >>>>>>> use >>>>>>>>> those >>>>>>>>>> jar files, they will simply run the ant script in sample >>>>> directory). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> My suggestion is to put these samples in to distributions >>>>> directory >>>>>>>>> rather >>>>>>>>>> keeping them in each modules directories. With current model >>>> it's >>>>>>> not >>>>>>>>> nice >>>>>>>>>> to keep another set of java files outside src directory in each >>>>>>>>> component. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>> Lahiru >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Aleksander Slominski < >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think they should be setup so they are compiled. I do not >>>> knwo >>>>>>>> maven >>>>>>>>> but >>>>>>>>>>> in eclipse youc an specify multiple source directories and that >>>>>>> shoudl >>>>>>>>>>> allow >>>>>>>>>>> to compile and run samples. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Is there the same problem for unit tests? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Alek >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Lahiru Gunathilake < >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Devs, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I have seen that samples in ws-messenger is scattered and >>>> they >>>>>>> are >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>> each >>>>>>>>>>>> module, when you import the code in to an IDE its not under >>>>>>>>> src/main/java >>>>>>>>>>>> directory so they do not looks like java class files. >>>> Normally >>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>>> not >>>>>>>>>>>> compiled during the build time, users have to compile them >>>> and >>>>>>> run >>>>>>>>> them >>>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>>> the distribution then it works out of the box. So I keeping >>>>> them >>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>>> distribution directory (all the samples for all the modules), >>>>> so >>>>>>> if >>>>>>>>>>> someone >>>>>>>>>>>> wants to look in to samples and do a modification, they can >>>>>>> simply >>>>>>>>> open >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>> samples and do that. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I have seen this in other projects and they are always keep >>>> the >>>>>>>>> samples >>>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>>> the distribution. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> WDYT ? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>>> Lahiru >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> https://www.cs.indiana.edu/~tgunarat/ >>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/thilina >>>>>>>>> http://thilina.gunarathne.org >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> >>
