Jason/Pieter, are you guys saying that you would prefer the publishing of an archtype over having gremlin-examples code? or are you saying you would have both? also, i spent a very short period of time looking at how to publish archtypes and didn't get the answers i wanted in that time - do either of you have experience with how that is done to offer a short synopsis?
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Jason Plurad <plur...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 I like the Maven archetype idea to encourage folks to build their own > projects. Great suggestion, Pieter. > On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 2:03 AM pieter-gmail <pieter.mar...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I have not looked at Jason's project but publishing some maven > > archetypes will be useful. Especially for the more complex setups with > > Hadoop, Spark, Neo4j etc. > > > > Cheers > > Pieter > > > > On 09/01/2016 21:07, Stephen Mallette wrote: > > > I was thinking that it might be cool to add a gremlin-examples > sub-module > > > that contained other sub-modules inside of that. Jason's "example > > project" > > > gets a lot of references and that's awesome but I'm starting to think > we > > > should fold it into the core repository (if he wants to do that, of > > course, > > > or we create a new one). > > > > > > I think we need to have sub-modules under gremlin-examples as there are > > > different types of examples folks might set up. There are ones like > > > Jason's that sorta demonstrate how to get going with a basic maven > > project, > > > then there are ones that might focus on gremlin-driver type > applications, > > > etc. I don't think we would publish new artifacts or anything for > these > > > projects but it would be nice to be able to directly reference them in > > > documentation and stuff and have them link right to TinkerPop code. > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > >
