I'd like to take some of these ideas and propose a slightly different addition:

Rename things.

I'm all for an extensible scaffolding base, however, I also see the need for 
showcases. I do not believe they should both be called "examples." If we're 
going to do a showcase, I would propose it be called a showcase or a demo. That 
small name change would hopefully help users understand the difference. A big 
showcase could be used well in a tutorial or documentation, a video series, 
etc. Especially if it is used in documentation it is more likely to be kept up 
to date. 

I'm honestly -1 for Maven archetypes. Sure, a single command to get up and 
running is great and all, but it is a fair amount of investment on our part for 
a one time thing for the user. I feel like we'd be better off putting that 
effort into the accelerators in kie-sandbox. That kind of feels like where we 
want people to be anyway (or vs code?). That said, if we decide to put more 
effort into an archetype (or multiple), I would not stop it.

On 2024/08/16 12:56:41 Enrique Gonzalez Martinez wrote:
> Hi Francisco,
> 
> I think we should base our drive on what the end user is asking and
> try to balance our efforts and what we have.
> The idea triggering the first thread is that there was a need, based
> on the user feedback, to have some sort of template in order to
> bootstrap a project.
> One of the ways to achieve this is to use the examples as a template.
> This have some benefits:
> 
> 1. The examples are in the CI pipeline (so we ensure they are always
> working and running
> 2. They provided the basic scenarios already.
> 
> Maven archetypes are a good idea but the cons:
> 1. We would duplicate the examples basically
> 2. Archetypes don't work very well with complex scenarios as they
> require some sort of processing for properties and stuff like that.
> 
> The idea that was discussed in the other thread was about making them
> standalone (so no dependencies in the parent pom was the constraint,
> no other constraints were mentioned) as
> this will tie the end user working stuff with our examples, which
> would cause problems. One of the ideas thrown in there was to create
> group dependencies. So even if we disagree about
> the purpose of the examples, we can agree about the group dependencies
> and clean up the parent pom of the project, then we can move this on
> as make a proposal about that:
> 
> 1. Create group dependencies based on valid scenarios
> 2. Clean up the parent pom of the examples and make them dependent on those.
> 
> The proposal would be "Create group dependencies for general kogito
> scenarios", and then use the examples as showcases if you like. Those
> group dependencies will give us the templates the user was asking for
> anyway.
> 
> El vie, 16 ago 2024 a las 14:26, Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti
> (<[email protected]>) escribió:
> >
> > Hi Tibor
> > In my opinion, the  purpose of the examples should be to showcase
> > functionality. And for stand alone application templates we should use
> > maven archetypes (which eventually will be deprecated)
> > Since I don't really like complete stand alone (because dependencies
> > change) I feel the template should still refer to the runtime BOM.
> > What users of the template will lack is formatting and other rules they do
> > not have to follow if developing applications outside the  Apache community
> > For applications (showcases)  within the apache community, users should
> > still use our parent pom, which I would rename from examples to something
> > more neutral (and locate it within runtimes)
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 12:45 PM Tibor Zimányi <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > based on the discussion from my proposal here (1), it is not clear what we
> > > expect from our kogito-examples (2). Some people expect, they are 
> > > templates
> > > for users to start their projects on, some others think they are just a
> > > showcase and expect users not to start their projects copying them, etc.
> > > (there may be other possible variations). So I am opening this thread for
> > > us to formally align on what should be the purpose of our examples. Please
> > > raise your voice, after we gather some feedback, I will open a vote, so we
> > > have a final agreement.
> > >
> > > My personal opinion is that from a user perspective, it is much easier to
> > > just take a prepared example and extend it. E.g. if I would like to 
> > > develop
> > > an application with rules and events, it would be much easier for me to
> > > just get an example and extend it. If I have to copy contents of some
> > > pom.xml files etc., or do a longer investigation, that would be just a
> > > complication. I personally prefer the use case of "Take and use".
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Tibor
> > >
> > > (1) https://lists.apache.org/thread/brfw8zfovck5ccsmd2z8hlx5fqkj1mkt
> > > (2) https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-examples
> > >
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> 
> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to