> > I agree about it being a bit disorganized and that makes it hard to > know where to start, there's so much stuff in the samples folder and > its all doing different types of things. I think i'd like to move all > the helloworld type things into a sub folder so as to separate it out > from the more complex stuff and where appropriate try to build on each > other eg so the binding.ws contribution reuses one of the helloworld > contributions etc. Something like this sort of layout: > > samples\GettingStarted > README.txt gives a step by step guide to using the things below > contributions/ > - helloworld > - helloworld-spring > - helloworld-bpel > - composites > - binding.ws > - binding.jms > - binding.http > - etc > runningTuscany/ > - Basic Java SE > - WebApp embedded > - WebApp With Contributions > - OSGi > - Shell > - SCAClient API > - Domain > > ...ant >
Sub-directories sounds like a good direction. I wonder whether we should separate the "GettingStarted" type samples such as helloworlds etc. from the "SCAFeatures" type samples which demonstrate individual extensions, or other features of the SCA sepcifications, at work. If we can find opportunities when samples share basic artifacts and build on one another that, again, sounds like a good idea. It reduces the amount the new user has to lear in order to understand what SCA is about. Simon -- Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
