Oh ok, so osgi integration contains things that would fall in multiple categories. It's just that i thought we shouldn't have too specific categories in the root of the samples folder. Either structure is fine by me. Are there other opinions which would help us deciding?
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Simon Laws <[email protected]>wrote: > > @Simon: Regarding the calculator sample, I don't know the exact content > of > > it. You guys are probably better suited to take this decision. > > Regarding the osgi samples, I personally wouldn't go into much deeper > > fragmentation at the root level of the samples/ folder, but I can see it > as > > a special subfolder of sca-features/ (like webapps/ for > getting-started/). > > But I also don't know what the osgi integration consists of.. > > (implementations, bindings?) > > > > > > If we're going to put it under features it would probably be better to > separate out the individual features, e.g. > > sca-features/ > implementation-osgi > distributed-osgi/ > static/ > dynamic/ > osgi-runtime/ > > We then already have some launcher content and we could extend it, e.g. > > running-tuscany/ > launcher-embedded-osi/ > launcher-osgi-runtime/ > > If people like this better than that's fine by me > > Simon > > Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org > Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com >
