Pete,
Sorry that I missed this the first time around. I think keeping
them separate is best, either in separate zip files or in separate
directories within a single installation. Separate zip files seems
slightly more work as it increases the installation testing needed
to ensure that both the SDO standalone case and the SCA+SDO case
install and run OK. However it does provide more flexibility for
users as you say.
Simon
Pete Robbins wrote:
OK... as I need to start on this several days ago I'm going to produce
seeparate zips for SDO and SCA.
On 08/06/06, Pete Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In the Tuscany C++ source tree we have a subproject for SDO and one for
SCA (which prereqs the SDO build). For a binary release should we combine
the build output into a single zip ro have a separate SDO zip?
If we do combine them we have a further option of the unzipped layout
having a separate structure for SDO and SCA:
<unzipdir>/tuscany/sca/ (bin, include, samples etc.)
<unzipdir>/tuscany/sdo/
(bin, include, samples etc.)
This is the way it is now and is the easiest to continue with but we
could
combine the 2 into
<unzipdir>/tuscany/ (bin, include, samples etc.)
Any thoughts?
My personal preference is to keep them separate as the sdo could be used
standalone.
--
Pete
--
Simon C Nash IBM Distinguished Engineer
Hursley Park, Winchester, UK [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel. +44-1962-815156 Fax +44-1962-818999
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
