On 8/22/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So not much consensus on what to do with this yet. The binary distro is
> currently coming in at 107MB. Of that the following 5 samples and demo's
> account for about 50MB:
>
> demo-allert-aggregator.war
> demo-mortgage-creditcheck.war
> sample-helloworld-ws-sdo-webapp.war
> sample-helloworld-ws-service-webapp.war
> sample-calculator-webapp-ws.war
>
> Should we delete these, keep these, delete some of these, keep but don't
> distribute pre-built artifacts? The three samples are quite similar so i
> think at least one maybe two of them could be removed for this release and
> then look at just having simple SCA contribution jar's for the samples and
> demo's for 1.0. (at least one of these was contributed by a user so we
> should try to keep that one)
>
>    ...ant
>
> On 8/14/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > So, let me try to understand this. We are going to remove the -webapp
> > samples from the release binary distribution (due to size constrains),
> > but we are still going to continue supporting the -webapp story. Users
> > can still see these samples on the source distributions, right ?
> >
> > I'm asking this because I think that our users DO use Tuscany in the
> > scenario of a -webapp, and if we are going to remove the -webapp
> > samples, users that are evaluating the new release might think we
> > removed the webapp support, so we need to be clear.
> >
> > If the webapp story is changing, then we should document (wiki) and
> > test so our users can migrate to the new story. If this requires
> > <implementation.web> I'd think we should implement these changes when
> > it's ready.
> >
> > As an alternative approach, what about creating a samples-webapp distro
> ?
> >
> > On 8/14/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 8/14/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ant elder wrote:
> > > > > On 8/14/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Anderson, Jeff T (CA - Toronto) wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> I like having the samples, in the absence of extensive
> > documentation
> > > > >>>
> > > > >> these are key to understanding Tuscany...
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> I like the idea of packaging the samples as simple SCA
> > contribution
> > > > >>>
> > > > >> jar's.  I think keeping the footprint as little as possible is
> > > > important,
> > > > >> both in terms of optics and managing the complexity and
> > understanding.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Just my humble opinion...
> > > > >>> Jeff
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >> +1 to keep the samples as simple SCA contribution JARs.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The current webapp packaging is not quite right anyway as it's
> > > > >> introducing a half baked mix of J2EE and SCA programming model
> > inside
> > > > >> the webapp.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I'd suggest the following:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> - Package SCA sample components as simple SCA contribution JARs,
> > stay
> > > > >> away from webapps.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> - To allow JSP and servlets to invoke SCA service component,
> > support
> > > > >> <implementation.web> Web components as described in [1].
> > > > >>
> > > > >> [1] http://www.osoa.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=3980
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > (now back on the dev list)
> > > > >
> > > > > Just to make sure I understand, as an example right now we have
> > > > > sample-helloworld-ws-service and
> > sample-helloworld-ws-service-webapp, do
> > > > we
> > > > > just delete the -webapp one?
> > > >
> > > > Yes
> > > >
> > > > > And then you can use the jar built by the
> > > > > sample-helloworld-ws-service with either the the Geronimo/Tuscany
> > > > > integration or our webapp runtime or with the standalone runtime
> we
> > > > already
> > > > > use it with today?
> > > > >
> > > > > That sounds like the way to go to me but that seems like quite a
> big
> > > > change,
> > > > > do we want to try to get this done in time for the upcoming
> release
> > or
> > > > wait
> > > > > till after that and just make the changes for 1.0?
> > > > >
> > > > >    ...ant
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I prefer to do it now. I'm not quite sure why it's a big change?
> > > >
> > > > Isn't it just about deleting Maven modules? we have equivalent
> samples
> > > > already working with the standalone runtime right?
> > > >
> > > > Is the Geronimo integration ready to be included in the the release?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Sebastien
> > >
> > >
> > > I also think sooner would be better so happy to help go for it.
> > >
> > > The list of current webapps is:
> > >
> > > demo-alert-aggregator
> > > demo-mortgage-creditcheck
> > > sample-calculator-webapp
> > > sample-chat-webapp
> > > sample-helloworld-dojo
> > > sample-helloworld-jsonrpc
> > > sample-helloworld-ws-sdo-webapp
> > > sample-helloworld-ws-service-webapp
> > >
> > > Not sure we do have equivalent non-webapp samples for all those, i'll
> > have a
> > > go at and seeing if they all those sample- ones run ok out side of a
> > > webapp.
> > >
> > >    ..ant
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Luciano Resende
> > Apache Tuscany Committer
> > http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> > http://lresende.blogspot.com/
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
If the build scripts work I would go for leaving them in but not
distributing the war. I don't think removing one sample is going to get the
kind of saving you're looking for. I remember there were issues with the
build scripts though so I'll have to see whether the build function was
taken out.

Simon

Reply via email to