This morning Ant, Simon L, Kelvin and I had a chat about the samples structure. We experimented with it at location [1].
The structure is basically the following: |-applications |---logging-scribe |---store |---store-webapp |-extending-tuscany |---implementation-sample |-getting-started |---helloworld-contribution |---helloworld-webapp |-running-tuscany |---launcher-command-line |---launcher-embedded-jse |---launcher-embedded-osgi |---launcher-embedded-osgi-base |---launcher-maven |---launcher-osgi |---launcher-shell |---launcher-webapp |-sca-extensions |---binding-comet |-----weather-webapp |---binding-jsonrpc |-----calculator-contribution |-----calculator-webapp |---binding-rmi |-----calculator-reference-contribution |-----calculator-service-contribution |---distributed-osgi |-----dosgi-calculator |-----dosgi-calculator-operations |-----dosgi-dynamic-calculator |-----dosgi-dynamic-calculator-operations |---implementation-script |-----calculator-contribution |---implementation-web |-----helloworld-jaxrs |-----helloworld-js-client |-----helloworld-stripes |---maven-osgi-junit |-----calculator-osgi |-----calculator-rest-osgi |-sca-features |---binding-jms |-----helloworld-jms |---binding-sca |-----calculator-contribution |---binding-ws |-----calculator-contribution |-----helloworld-ws-sdo |---implementation-bpel |-----helloworld-bpel-contribution |-----helloworld-bpel-webapp |---implementation-composite |-----helloworld-recursive-ws |---implementation-java |-----calculator-contribution |---implementation-spring |-----helloworld-spring-contribution |-----helloworld-spring-webapp |---implementation-web |-----helloworld-jsf |-----helloworld-jsp |-----helloworld-servlet |---sca-client |-----calculator-scaclient |-----helloworld-scaclient |---scdl-include |-----helloworld-include We'd like to move it to trunk, are there any other modifications wanted? [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/sandbox/samples/ On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 2:03 PM, kelvin goodson <kelvingood...@apache.org>wrote: > If you are following this thread you may like to use the recent > comment in the jira [1] to catch up on where things are (still lots of > entropy yet) > > Kelvin. > > [1] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3677?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel > > > > > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 3:15 PM, Florian MOGA <moga....@gmail.com> wrote: > > Oh ok, so osgi integration contains things that would fall in multiple > > categories. It's just that i thought we shouldn't have too specific > > categories in the root of the samples folder. Either structure is fine by > > me. Are there other opinions which would help us deciding? > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Simon Laws <simonsl...@googlemail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> > @Simon: Regarding the calculator sample, I don't know the exact > content > >> > of > >> > it. You guys are probably better suited to take this decision. > >> > Regarding the osgi samples, I personally wouldn't go into much deeper > >> > fragmentation at the root level of the samples/ folder, but I can see > it > >> > as > >> > a special subfolder of sca-features/ (like webapps/ for > >> > getting-started/). > >> > But I also don't know what the osgi integration consists of.. > >> > (implementations, bindings?) > >> > > >> > > >> > >> If we're going to put it under features it would probably be better to > >> separate out the individual features, e.g. > >> > >> sca-features/ > >> implementation-osgi > >> distributed-osgi/ > >> static/ > >> dynamic/ > >> osgi-runtime/ > >> > >> We then already have some launcher content and we could extend it, e.g. > >> > >> running-tuscany/ > >> launcher-embedded-osi/ > >> launcher-osgi-runtime/ > >> > >> If people like this better than that's fine by me > >> > >> Simon > >> > >> Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org > >> Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com > > > > >
