On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 3:31 PM, haleh mahbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In the write-up it says: > > When this module is loaded at runtime the contents of this file are made > generally available and hence in your composite you can use statements such > as. > Can you point out what is enabled in the composite as a result of the xml > definition above it? > > Thanks > > > On 8/1/08, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 12:20 AM, haleh mahbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> This is a great idea. Scenarios put things in perspective. >>> >>> >>> On 7/28/08, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Looking through our user doc there is not much there that describes what >>>> features are available and how to use them. Some have detail, e.g JMS [1], >>>> some are non existent, e.g. Spring [2]. We (I) tend to get excited about >>>> implementing spec features or implementing Tuscany extensions. Personally >>>> when doing this I generally have a scenario in mind where I think the >>>> feature would be useful. I think it would be good to record these scenarios >>>> so others can read how we intended the software to work. I see we've >>>> started >>>> doing this in a few places. Ant's JMS examples [1] are mini scenarios, >>>> Luciano started adding scenarios to the Web2.0 roadmap ideas [3]. Also >>>> there >>>> are some other scenarios associated with the databinding testing I think >>>> Vamsi was doing [4]. >>>> >>>> I was thinking about some different types of scenario so I made some >>>> notes [4]. I'm going to try and record Tuscany feature kind of info (maybe >>>> directly into the user guide if no one objects) in an attempt to achieve >>>> the >>>> following without having to think to hard about generating user docs >>>> subsequently. >>>> >>>> scenario -> helps define tests -> helps drive function -> most >>>> importantly describes to the user how a feature works >>>> >>>> Thoughts? >>>> >>>> Simon >>>> >>>> [1] http://tuscany.apache.org/sca-java-bindingjms.html >>>> [2] http://tuscany.apache.org/sca-java-implementationspring.html >>>> [3] http://tuscany.apache.org/sca-java-roadmap.html >>>> [4] http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/Scenarios >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> Well I didn't get many to bite on this. I've added a definitions.xml page >> to the User Guide (as we need one) [1] but used it as an excuse to document >> a scenario we don't currently support correctly ( >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2499). Is this approach >> reasonable? The "scenario" could quite easily have gone in the JIRA but >> useful to have it somewhere and I just chose to put it in the User Guide in >> this case. >> >> I'm going to do a few more and I'll report back on how it goes. >> >> Simon >> >> [1] >> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANY/SCA+Java+definitions.xml >> >> > > Ok I added a line, take another look. Simon
