Berin Loritsch wrote:
Errr, that's exactly why I prefer documentation.From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Berin Loritsch wrote:From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
If we decide to set up an avalon CVS module and put all content in there, I can start the restructuring, and we can work together to put it in better shape.
If you want to propose, then +1 from me--although we need to determine
what is the long-term structure of the CVS archive going to look like?
We should pick a scalable strategy.Initial take:
-- avalon
-- legal
-- lib
-- src--java
--test
--deprecated
--documentation
--resources
This is as clean IMHO as it can be with one codebase.
I would change "documentation" to xdocs. It's clearer about
what goes in there.
In fact, with Forrest you can put all contents in the same dir, html, xdocs, pdfs, svg, etc and have them in the output.
So it would be (almost link in Phoenix)
-- avalon
..
-- src...
--documentation
-- content
-- resources
Where content is all content and resources are images, pdfs, etc that can be referenced easily from any content subdir.
What is in "resources"? Is that where i18n properties and such go?
Nope.
Yes, I agree.* I like i18n/l10n properties to be incorporated into the source directory. It is handy to have right there.
Resources would keep logos, extra stuff, and basically anything that is needed but does not go in the output jar or is not tied to a java package.
* I like to have a different directory for client code (AKA the A5 equiv. of Framework) separate from the container code. I think they should have a separate directory.
Yes, it's a good idea.
Under src, because it's part of the "source"Question is, under src/ or root directory?
But the problem comes with more than one programming language... should c# use this CVS module? ./lib though is not about c#m, so it seems ackward...
If we only had java I would do (as in Cocoon):
-- avalon
-- build (tmp)
-- dist (tmp)
-- legal
-- lib (though we will be downloading them, this is to override)
-- src
--framework
--container
--test
--deprecated
--documentation
-- content
-- resources
--resources
-- logos
The naming is not important, we can decide this, what I am defining is the structure now.
* I like the deprecated directory. It forces us to write our code so that we *don't* need it, but will support it if we must.
Yup.
* I would like to make the addendum that upon a release, we mark all deprecated code with both a replacement, and the date we expect to remove the code. That way our users are adequately warned, and we have a reminder of what cruft is safe to remove.
Agreed. Instead of @since, we would then add a @till javadoc.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
