About archetypes, I would like to mention some details (I created some and in general I like them) 1. they are cumbersome to create 2. they are cumbersome to maintain 3. by themsel es they do not resolve the problem, for end user, of new versions/ different gav. I have the impression we are mixing two different problems 1 simplicity of create a new project (for end user) 2 simplicity of maintenance of the project
Il Ven 16 Ago 2024, 17:23 Jason Porter <[email protected]> ha scritto: > I'd like to take some of these ideas and propose a slightly different > addition: > > Rename things. > > I'm all for an extensible scaffolding base, however, I also see the need > for showcases. I do not believe they should both be called "examples." If > we're going to do a showcase, I would propose it be called a showcase or a > demo. That small name change would hopefully help users understand the > difference. A big showcase could be used well in a tutorial or > documentation, a video series, etc. Especially if it is used in > documentation it is more likely to be kept up to date. > > I'm honestly -1 for Maven archetypes. Sure, a single command to get up and > running is great and all, but it is a fair amount of investment on our part > for a one time thing for the user. I feel like we'd be better off putting > that effort into the accelerators in kie-sandbox. That kind of feels like > where we want people to be anyway (or vs code?). That said, if we decide to > put more effort into an archetype (or multiple), I would not stop it. > > On 2024/08/16 12:56:41 Enrique Gonzalez Martinez wrote: > > Hi Francisco, > > > > I think we should base our drive on what the end user is asking and > > try to balance our efforts and what we have. > > The idea triggering the first thread is that there was a need, based > > on the user feedback, to have some sort of template in order to > > bootstrap a project. > > One of the ways to achieve this is to use the examples as a template. > > This have some benefits: > > > > 1. The examples are in the CI pipeline (so we ensure they are always > > working and running > > 2. They provided the basic scenarios already. > > > > Maven archetypes are a good idea but the cons: > > 1. We would duplicate the examples basically > > 2. Archetypes don't work very well with complex scenarios as they > > require some sort of processing for properties and stuff like that. > > > > The idea that was discussed in the other thread was about making them > > standalone (so no dependencies in the parent pom was the constraint, > > no other constraints were mentioned) as > > this will tie the end user working stuff with our examples, which > > would cause problems. One of the ideas thrown in there was to create > > group dependencies. So even if we disagree about > > the purpose of the examples, we can agree about the group dependencies > > and clean up the parent pom of the project, then we can move this on > > as make a proposal about that: > > > > 1. Create group dependencies based on valid scenarios > > 2. Clean up the parent pom of the examples and make them dependent on > those. > > > > The proposal would be "Create group dependencies for general kogito > > scenarios", and then use the examples as showcases if you like. Those > > group dependencies will give us the templates the user was asking for > > anyway. > > > > El vie, 16 ago 2024 a las 14:26, Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti > > (<[email protected]>) escribió: > > > > > > Hi Tibor > > > In my opinion, the purpose of the examples should be to showcase > > > functionality. And for stand alone application templates we should use > > > maven archetypes (which eventually will be deprecated) > > > Since I don't really like complete stand alone (because dependencies > > > change) I feel the template should still refer to the runtime BOM. > > > What users of the template will lack is formatting and other rules > they do > > > not have to follow if developing applications outside the Apache > community > > > For applications (showcases) within the apache community, users should > > > still use our parent pom, which I would rename from examples to > something > > > more neutral (and locate it within runtimes) > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 12:45 PM Tibor Zimányi <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > based on the discussion from my proposal here (1), it is not clear > what we > > > > expect from our kogito-examples (2). Some people expect, they are > templates > > > > for users to start their projects on, some others think they are > just a > > > > showcase and expect users not to start their projects copying them, > etc. > > > > (there may be other possible variations). So I am opening this > thread for > > > > us to formally align on what should be the purpose of our examples. > Please > > > > raise your voice, after we gather some feedback, I will open a vote, > so we > > > > have a final agreement. > > > > > > > > My personal opinion is that from a user perspective, it is much > easier to > > > > just take a prepared example and extend it. E.g. if I would like to > develop > > > > an application with rules and events, it would be much easier for me > to > > > > just get an example and extend it. If I have to copy contents of some > > > > pom.xml files etc., or do a longer investigation, that would be just > a > > > > complication. I personally prefer the use case of "Take and use". > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Tibor > > > > > > > > (1) https://lists.apache.org/thread/brfw8zfovck5ccsmd2z8hlx5fqkj1mkt > > > > (2) https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-examples > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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] > >
