Beck, I'd err towards Scenario 2 that you described; that's what has worked for us typically. I'm not sure what you mean by "Use Case" in your case, but that would be a pretty high-level of granularity for me.
I'd probably have a single controller, and I'd have a single ModelLocator but introduce extra hierarchy into the commands, business and VO packages as needs be. However, to be honest ... This isn't the kind of thing I'd advocate as "it must be done this way". Common sense is that your source should be easy to navigate, easy to reuse, maintainable - and if you're achieving those goals, you're winning IMHO. For me, this is one of those academic debates where the debate is lifted as soon as it's a real-world implementation and we can make informed common-sense decisions. So - your approach(es) look good to me. Help ? Steven -- Steven Webster Practice Director (Rich Internet Applications) Adobe Consulting Westpoint, 4 Redheughs Rigg, South Gyle, Edinburgh, EH12 9DQ, UK p: +44 (0) 131 338 6108 m: +44 (0) 7917 428 947 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Beck Novaes > Sent: 01 February 2006 13:14 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [flexcoders] Cairngorm Folder Structure > > What do you think is the best way to structure folders in a > big Cairngorm Application? -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
