I guess I was thinking that the technology type samples would be
the ones
that are now moved further down into the folder hierarchy so the only
thing
left up at the top would be the business samples so there wasn't
the need
for the two folders 'samples' and 'sampleapps' so sampleapps might
as well
just be renamed to samples to keep everything consistent.
Please anyone say if they disagree with that. I'd also still like
to hear
comments or suggestions on all this from others who've expressed an
interest
in the samples in the past before I make the changes - Jim ,
Rick, Simon?
...ant
On 10/6/06, Brent Daniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Previously we had discussed having a "sampleapps" directory to
> distinguish "business samples" from technology samples.[1] Do we
want
> to continue this distinction?
>
> Brent
>
>
> [1] -
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg01812.html
>
> On 10/6/06, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Ok I think we're getting some agreement but I'd like to be clear
> everyone
> > agrees and is happy before I make any changes. Sounds like for
things
> like
> > the Groovy/JavaScript/etc helloworld and calculator type
samples they
> would
> > go with the extension, I'm guessing samples that use just sca
and java
> would
> > go in an sca/samples directory. Samples that use multiple
extensions
but
> > still just SCA would also go in the sca/samples directory, and
there'd
> be a
> > top level samples directory for things like bigbank that use
> sca/sdo/das.
> >
> > So:
> >
> > samples/bingbank
> > das/samples/companyweb
> > sca/samples/calculator
> > sca/services/containers/container.javascript/src/samples/
calculator
> >
> > Comments?
> >
> > ...ant
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Jim Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Oct 5, 2006, at 7:14 AM, ant elder wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> I think organizing the samples like this is a good idea. I'd
> suggest
> > > >> going one step further and place each sample with the
> implementation
> > > >> of the service that it is illustrating. That way it
becomes much
> > > >> easier to tag/release each module on its own.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure I follow "place each sample with the
implementation
of
> > > > the
> > > > service that it is illustrating" , do you mean something
like:
> > > >
> > > > samples/helloworld/java
> > > > samples/helloworld/javascript
> > > > samples/calculator/java
> > > > samples/calculator/javascript
> > > >
> > > > Or do you mean include them with the extension so the
JavaScript
> > > > folder
> > > > would include samples/helloworld and samples/calculator? I
didn't
> > > > think Jim
> > > > liked this way, from the previous thread - "In other
words, each
> > > > sample
> > > > project should not be a sibling to the project containing
extension
> > > > code but
> > > > should go under a samples folder in separate projects".
> > > I was thinking samples for particular extensions would go
under the
> > > particular extension's directory. For samples that used
multiple
> > > extensions, they would go under the master samples folder. I
liked
> > > what was done with the calculator where stuff is shared between
> > > projects (component reuse) so if that structuring won't work
for re-
> > > use I would be fine with what Ant just outlined. My preference,
> > > though, would be to group samples with individual extensions.
> > >
> > > Jim
> > >
> > > >
> > > > ...ant
> > >
> > >
> > >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
