Hi All, While we let other thread on leaf modules going, here is a abstract suggestion for maven modules. Please critique:
We need to ensure the directory structure used for code navigability should not created additional maven release artifacts. In 0.15 and earlier versions, we have been releasing these empty artifacts for no good reason. ├── airavata-api │ ├── airavata-api-interface-descriptions (these are the thrift IDL’s) │ ├── airavata-data-models (thrift generated data models, used by clients, components and api server) │ ├── airavata-api-java-stubs (thrift generated java stubs used by clients as well has servers for implementations) │ ├── airavata-api-server (api service handlers and startup classes) │ ├── api-security-manager (gsoc project to add API level oauth security) ├── clients (self explanatory client SDK’s - thrift generated code plus samples) │ ├── airavata-client-cpp-sdk │ ├── airavata-client-java-sdk │ ├── airavata-client-php-sdk │ ├── airavata-client-python-sdk │ ├── airavata-sample-examples │ └── airavata-xbaya-gui ├── distribution ├── integration-tests For component organization we can go any number of ways. The fundamental proposition I have is components are literally loosely coupled and live by themselves. One suggestion is to organize all component interface descriptions, services and clients into and then component implementations (which internally can have interfaces, implementations of these interfaces, util packages and so forth). ├── components │ ├── commons │ ├── component-interface-descriptions │ ├── component-services │ │ ├── credential-store-service │ │ ├── orchestrator-service │ │ ├── task-executor-service │ │ └── workflow-interpreter-service │ ├── component-clients │ │ ├── credential-store-client │ │ ├── orchestrator-client │ │ ├── task-executor-client │ │ ├── workflow-interpreter-client │ │ └── messaging │ ├── orchestrator-component-impl │ │ ├── orchestrator-interface │ │ └── orchestrator-impl…. │ ├── registry │ │ ├── app-catalog │ │ ├── experiment-catalog │ │ └── resource-catalog Other suggestion is to organize by a component. Within the component it can also have the service interfaces and clients. This facilitates to have one more then one component implementing the same component interface. They are used based on usecases and stability. In no scenario we should have one component implementation depending on other component’s implementation. If there is really a common functionality we should have a module in commons used by both. At most the component should only have dependency to component's thrift clients or in case of registry and messaging appropriate java clients. This is again abstract, once we debate on the down sides and address them, we can make this concrete to cover it all. Cheers, Suresh
