No I haven't, go ahead. I created an issue for combining the two samples as proposed and scheduled it tentatively for 1.0.1. Thanks - should have added the ASF headers myself.
Kalle On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> wrote: > Kalle, have you started to move this stuff? > > I was just about to commit changes to most of those files by adding in > the ASF header, but I thought I'd check first to avoid merge > conflicts. > > - Les > > On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> wrote: >> I agree - the Quickstart main is good enough as a unit-test-like >> example to demonstrate the API. Beyond that, a proper standalone >> example application should probably demonstrate a nicer feature set >> (like aspectj integration). Good idea :) >> >> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Kalle Korhonen >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Wanted to close out SHIRO-129 (aspectj integration) so I just >>> mavenized and committed the contributed sample (not attached to the >>> reactor build yet). We also have a rudimentary standalone sample which >>> actually isn't much of an app but just main that behaves like a unit >>> test. The aspectj sample doesn't have main() at the moment but the >>> sample domain is decent and complete enough so we could easily create >>> a simple standalone app around it. I'm thinking that we should just >>> drop the current standalone, rename the aspectj as the standalone >>> sample and make it a runnable desktop app. What say you? >>> >>> Kalle >>> >> >
