On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Florian MOGA <[email protected]> wrote: > I personally like the shell and the shell idea very much and I agree it > would be the way to go (no Maven/Ant discrimination). The major problem in > using the shell is that it implies a decent amount of knowledge with terms > like domain, node, contribution which (we all know) aren't very well defined > in our documentation on the website and the specs.
Yep i agree, that is a major problem. For virtually all the examples we've had in the past we've used just a single contribution and no real domain which to an extend has avoided those issues. I guess we need to decide if we want to keep avoiding them or start trying to promote the domain concepts more. > I remember the early days of getting familiar with Tuscany when I had a hard > time running the samples as they implied various launchers which were > running tuscany embedded and didn't help very much in understanding the > runtime as I had no "low level" control over it. All I wanted to see were > jars which I could run and wars which i could deploy manually (things that i > was already familiar with). I find Ant's suggestion for the save feature > very good and it solves this problem. > However, the user still needs to configure his contributions manually at the > moment. My proposal is to also have a feature for the shell that can run > tuscany shell script files. This will make things nice and easy. This is > also a feature i suggest we need to have as it makes complex domain > configurations to be started up very easy. I've listed more advantages here > [1]. I see these tuscany shell script files as files containing shell > commands on each line. This way, the user can either start the runtime using > the shell scripts we'd provide either "export" or "save" it to a standalone > jar and run it manually. > Thoughts? > [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg13683.html > That sounds like a good approach to me, i guess we need to decide (1) if this is the way we want to go and if so then do the work to get all that going, and (2) even if we do think thats useful do we want to do it for all these getting started samples or is there something simpler to begin with and leave this for teh learning more samples. I quite like the approach so if we can make it work well with scripts and with clear display output in the shell etc then it might be worth using from the getting started samples. ...ant
