On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:04 AM, Simon Laws <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Luciano Resende <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> I'm trying to catch up on this thread, could someone summarize what's >> the current status and open items ? >> >> > > Hi Luciano > > I'll give it a go. > > We've had a long discussion about the structure of the distribution. The > prime focus of which (IMO) has been the structure of the modules dir. Some > here would like to add some but there is a snag in that you can easily > determine which jars are shared. > > On the test alignment piece. I've been playing with the distribution as it > is over the last couple of days to try and answer the conversation that > started all this. Working off the "all" distro this is what I have so > far.... > > tuscany-sca-2.0-SNAPSHOT/ > modules/ > still a flat directory with all modules and 3rd party jars > samples/ > core/ > binding-sca-calculator/ > src/ > build.xml > webapp > host-webapp-calculator > webservice > binding-ws-calculator > > Note. > the samples are grouped > I've flipped the names of these example samples to point out their main > reason for being.
Are we still planning to have multiple distributions in the future ? If so, what issue we are trying to solve by grouping the samples in sub-directories compared to different distributions ? > > In the case binding-sca-calculator, for example, the ant build.xml runs the > sample using either the JSE or OSGI laucher. I've made no changes to > launchers yet subject to discussion on the other thread. So in this case the > sample is just a contribution. There is a JUnit test but again this just > calls the lanucher and treats the sample as a contribution. There is a > client conponent in the sample that drives it. > Ok > I'm looking at extending the distro module to run the ant script to autmate > the process we have struggled with in the past. In a way I'd rather have > this happen as JUnit time but maybe that won't work out. I certainly need > some help with the webapp version as we need to fire up cargo or something > to ensure that we can test the webapp deploy stage. > If we are trying to solve the issue where we never run our samples using ant/distribution, this is a good idea. How about something like a "build smoke test" profile that, after building a distribution would try to unpack and exercise it using ant ? > haven't checked these bits in yet. > > That's what I see so far. > > Simon > -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/
