I think it is a very good suggestion. In the past, many people have contributed to seata-sample, but the lack of unified standards has led to poor readability of the code and even some that cannot run normally. I would like to add a suggestion that for code examples targeting cross-service calls, try to maintain a unified business scenario as much as possible.
Warm regards, Ji Min yixia <[email protected]> 于2024年1月6日周六 22:54写道： > Greetings all! > > The specifications of different modules in the seata samples project are > inconsistent. > > For example: > > 1. pom: some modules depend on the top of seata-samples, some have their > own dependencies, which are prone to conflicts. > > 2. naming: some module names are unclear, such as dubbo and etcd3. users > cannot understand the meaning of the project from the naming. > > > Therefore, we need to define a set of specifications for the code of seata > samples. > > *# Directory Structure* > > The first and second levels are more of a directory > > Top level: seata-samples > > Second layer: at-sample, tcc-sample, saga-sample, xa-sample > > Third floor, The third layer is the specific sample and the naming > convention is as follows: > > *# naming* > > naming with framework: spring-nacos-seata, springboot-naocs-zk-seata ... > > *# dependency* > > pom: The dependencies of each sample should be independent and should not > depend on the dependencies of the parent pom of seata samples. > > > You can leave your comments or vote whether you agree with this suggestion. >
