Agree that UI is important and is necessary to show the full value of
brooklyn. The question is though if it should built in a separate
repository.
For my a brooklyn-core (the server side) has value on its own. First
off, because of the rest api it allows for building various GUIs (if
anybody wanted that). Second, from my experience, UI developers would
prefer to work on the webui as a separate project, with separate tools,
without the java baggage. The only thing the would need to know is just
how to start the server (an interesting alternative being having a
hosted brooklyn server for them, ideally somewhere on the ASF infra).
Third a separate brooklyn-core would allow for building automation tools
without the webui baggage.
The conclusion being that I agree with you, but I don't think that webui
in the same repo or another makes a difference. There is however the
matter of circular deps in building the distro (and that applies to
brooklyn-library too). Does that mean that we should have a
brooklyn-distro as the 4th repository that would contain the full release?
Cheers,
Hadrian
On 11/18/2015 04:04 AM, Andrea Turli wrote:
Personally I would like to see the apache/incubator-brooklyn carved
up as
follows:
* apache/brooklyn
* apache/brooklyn-ui
* apache/brooklyn-library
+ 1 to
* apache/brooklyn
* apache/brooklyn-library
I'm still not entirely convinced that apache/brooklyn without the UI shows
off the entire potential of brooklyn, but no strong feelings.
Any comments?
Andrea
