You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Dave Colasurdo <da...@earthlink.net> on 2005/10/27 00:56:48 UTC
Applications directory structure
There have been several previous conversations regarding the structure
of the geronimo/applications directory. It seems that there should be
some way to differentiate the various categories of applications?
Perhaps something like:
geronimo/applications/samples/ would contain:
-demo
-servlets-examples
-jsp-examples
-magicGball
-dayTrader
-bigPetEJBSess
-petStore
geronimo/applications/system would contain:
-console*
-jmxdebug
-uddi-server
-welcome
Thanks
-Dave-
Re: Applications directory structure
Posted by John Sisson <js...@apache.org>.
Sounds fine to me.
John
Dave Colasurdo wrote:
> There have been several previous conversations regarding the structure
> of the geronimo/applications directory. It seems that there should be
> some way to differentiate the various categories of applications?
>
> Perhaps something like:
>
> geronimo/applications/samples/ would contain:
> -demo
> -servlets-examples
> -jsp-examples
> -magicGball
> -dayTrader
> -bigPetEJBSess
> -petStore
>
> geronimo/applications/system would contain:
> -console*
> -jmxdebug
> -uddi-server
> -welcome
>
> Thanks
> -Dave-
>
Re: Applications directory structure
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
I like the division. Generally I think you can rm-Rf samples but I'd probably
think twice about doing the same to system. (Of course I'm not that smart so
thinking twice doesn't guarantee a positive outcome :)
Matt
Dave Colasurdo wrote:
>
>
> Jacek Laskowski wrote:
>
>>
>> It looks fine to me. I've got a question, I can't stop thinking about
>> (I hope it hasn't been discussed). What's the point to structure it
>> this way? Is it going to be better to have two directories and a bunch
>> of subdirectories instead of these subdirs at one level up? Not, that
>> I'm questioning it, just wonder what benefits are given with such a
>> structure.
>>
>
> As you know, the directory structure can be any arbitrary way we choose
> to structure it. Just seems that separating the samples from the system
> applications is a logical dividing line. Users that want to experiment
> and rebuild the samples in the source tree will quickly understand this
> distinction. Don't want folks playing with the system applications
> unless they really know what they are doing.. So, it is really just a
> better way to show this distinction.
>
>
>
Re: Applications directory structure
Posted by Dave Colasurdo <da...@earthlink.net>.
Jacek Laskowski wrote:
>
> It looks fine to me. I've got a question, I can't stop thinking about (I
> hope it hasn't been discussed). What's the point to structure it this
> way? Is it going to be better to have two directories and a bunch of
> subdirectories instead of these subdirs at one level up? Not, that I'm
> questioning it, just wonder what benefits are given with such a structure.
>
As you know, the directory structure can be any arbitrary way we choose
to structure it. Just seems that separating the samples from the system
applications is a logical dividing line. Users that want to experiment
and rebuild the samples in the source tree will quickly understand this
distinction. Don't want folks playing with the system applications
unless they really know what they are doing.. So, it is really just a
better way to show this distinction.
Re: Applications directory structure
Posted by Jacek Laskowski <jl...@apache.org>.
Dave Colasurdo wrote:
> There have been several previous conversations regarding the structure
> of the geronimo/applications directory. It seems that there should be
> some way to differentiate the various categories of applications?
>
> Perhaps something like:
>
> geronimo/applications/samples/ would contain:
> -demo
> -servlets-examples
> -jsp-examples
> -magicGball
> -dayTrader
> -bigPetEJBSess
> -petStore
>
> geronimo/applications/system would contain:
> -console*
> -jmxdebug
> -uddi-server
> -welcome
It looks fine to me. I've got a question, I can't stop thinking about (I
hope it hasn't been discussed). What's the point to structure it this
way? Is it going to be better to have two directories and a bunch of
subdirectories instead of these subdirs at one level up? Not, that I'm
questioning it, just wonder what benefits are given with such a structure.
> -Dave-
Jacek
Re: Applications directory structure
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
That works.
Dave Colasurdo wrote:
> There have been several previous conversations regarding the structure
> of the geronimo/applications directory. It seems that there should be
> some way to differentiate the various categories of applications?
>
> Perhaps something like:
>
> geronimo/applications/samples/ would contain:
> -demo
> -servlets-examples
> -jsp-examples
> -magicGball
> -dayTrader
> -bigPetEJBSess
> -petStore
>
> geronimo/applications/system would contain:
> -console*
> -jmxdebug
> -uddi-server
> -welcome
>
> Thanks
> -Dave-
>
>
>
Re: Applications directory structure
Posted by Dave Colasurdo <da...@earthlink.net>.
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> On Oct 26, 2005, at 3:56 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote:
>
>> There have been several previous conversations regarding the
>> structure of the geronimo/applications directory. It seems that there
>> should be some way to differentiate the various categories of
>> applications?
>>
>> Perhaps something like:
>>
>> geronimo/applications/samples/ would contain:
>> -demo
>> -servlets-examples
>> -jsp-examples
>> -magicGball
>> -dayTrader
>> -bigPetEJBSess
>> -petStore
>
>
> Which directory do you mean?
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/trunk/applications/samples
>
> or
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/applications/samples
>
> I would prefer that the samples be outside located off of the geronimo
> svn root and not in trunk. This will allow them to be developed and
> released independently of the mail line server.
>
A few points/questions..
I suspect we will want to pull a few of the samples (servlets-examples,
jsp-examples, ejb-examples) into the generated G images (definitely into
the installer as selectable options and arguably into the zipped binary
images). This means that the main G tree will have dependencies on
things that are now outside of main trunk (geronimo/trunk). Will the
restructure somehow address getting them pulled into the main G
distributions? Does this imply that developers need to also download
the samples source when doing a build of the main trunk? Or is the
assumption that full builds require the full geronimo root checkout?
Perhaps we move a few select select samples (servlets-examples,
jsp-examples, ejb-examples)into the main trunk and leave the others
outside.
In a separate thread you suggested versioning the samples.. Are you
suggesting versioning the individual samples? Or are you saying that
the group of samples would be versioned as applicable to a specific G
release?
>> geronimo/applications/system would contain:
>> -console*
>> -jmxdebug
>> -uddi-server
>> -welcome
>
>
> I was thinking more along the lines of
>
> geronimo/trunk/applications/console-${part} --> geronimo/trunk/
> console/${part}
> geronimo/trunk/applications/welcome --> geronimo/trunk/ welcome
> (not sure... is this the tomcat/jetty welcome app?)
> geronimo/trunk/applications/uddi-server --> geronimo/applications/
> uddi-server
> geronimo/trunk/applications/jmxdebug --> geronimo/sandbox/
> jmxdebug/trunk (I think this need more work or we should simply drop it)
>
Should we consider putting these applications under a common directory
(e.g. system) that groups them and signifies their strong ties to the G
system?
Also, the same point as above applies about the main tree build
dependency on the system applications. I see you included console and
welcome in the trunk. I suspect uddi-server and jmxdebug also belong in
trunk as they are likely part of the default binary distribution. I
did hear that the jmxdebug app is being reworked..
> -dain
>
>
Re: Applications directory structure
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
On Oct 26, 2005, at 3:56 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote:
> There have been several previous conversations regarding the
> structure of the geronimo/applications directory. It seems that
> there should be some way to differentiate the various categories of
> applications?
>
> Perhaps something like:
>
> geronimo/applications/samples/ would contain:
> -demo
> -servlets-examples
> -jsp-examples
> -magicGball
> -dayTrader
> -bigPetEJBSess
> -petStore
Which directory do you mean?
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/trunk/applications/samples
or
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/applications/samples
I would prefer that the samples be outside located off of the
geronimo svn root and not in trunk. This will allow them to be
developed and released independently of the mail line server.
> geronimo/applications/system would contain:
> -console*
> -jmxdebug
> -uddi-server
> -welcome
I was thinking more along the lines of
geronimo/trunk/applications/console-${part} --> geronimo/trunk/
console/${part}
geronimo/trunk/applications/welcome --> geronimo/trunk/
welcome (not sure... is this the tomcat/jetty welcome app?)
geronimo/trunk/applications/uddi-server --> geronimo/applications/
uddi-server
geronimo/trunk/applications/jmxdebug --> geronimo/sandbox/
jmxdebug/trunk (I think this need more work or we should simply drop
it)
-dain