Hi Hugo, Chris, I use the same layout as Chris or you Hug's B option (I think both are the same if I'm interpreting right). Just notice that the Modules are not working fully right now as we noticed few weeks ago. I think debug is working but not released (maybe Greg can say if that's true or not).
I think that's something that needs the expertise of Greg and Josh to make it fully work. Hope they can finally work at some point. El jue., 22 oct. 2020 a las 10:57, Hugo Ferreira (<[email protected]>) escribió: > Hi Christofer, > > Thank you. > > Interesting. > Seems to follow better MVC pattern for a large application. > I like it. > > Christofer Dutz <[email protected]> escreveu no dia quinta, > 22/10/2020 à(s) 09:53: > > > Hi Hugo, > > > > in my Home Automation demo, I split up all Modules into separate maven > > modules. > > So right now I have sort of this structure > > > > MainModule > > - model > > - view > > - controller > > > > ModuleA > > - model > > - view > > - controller > > > > ModuleB > > - model > > - view > > - controller > > > > The MainModule model contains all the types needed by the MainModule and > > which are shared among all modules and it takes care of loading ModuleA > and > > ModuleB > > ModuleA and ModuleB each have the model classes they need exclusively > > inside > > > > Not sure if this is the Royale way, but it's sort of what replicates the > > structure I have in my backend. > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > Am 22.10.20, 10:47 schrieb "Hugo Ferreira" <[email protected]>: > > > > Hi, > > > > Looking for TodoMVC example, it's perfect. > > It follows the MVC pattern at the point but we are talking about a > > small > > application with less then 10 files. > > > > On my current Flex application I'm using a different organization > from > > the > > standard MVC: > > + models > > -- all model files > > > > + module_name_1 > > -- MainViewName1.mxml > > -- MainManagerName1.as > > -- + some other sub-module_name_1 > > ---- ViewName2.mxml > > ---- ManagerName2.as > > > > + module_name_2 > > -- MainViewName3.mxml > > -- ManagerName3.as > > > > Somehow, it's MVC and all operations are in correspondente manager > > (controller) as file. > > > > Looking now I'm not very satisfied with the solution. It's working > and > > I > > will not change, it is what it is, however on my ongoing Royale > > version I > > can do a complete different approach. > > There are hundread of mxml and as files, so the organization about > > models > > (all as model files) + views (all mxml files) + controllers (all as > > controller files) with end up with a non standard MVC organization > > structure. > > > > I'm thinking in one of two new approach: > > Approach A: > > + models > > + views > > --+ module_1 > > ---- mxml1 > > ---- mxml2 > > + controllers > > --+module_1 > > ---- as1 > > ---- as2 > > > > Approach B: > > + models > > --+ module_1 > > ----+views > > ----+controllers > > --+ module_2 > > ----+views > > ----+controllers > > > > What do you guys think ? > > Do you do MVC structure as the TodoMVC example or use a different > > approach > > as I do. > > Do you think Approach A it's better than B or do you have a third > > option ? > > > > > -- Carlos Rovira Apache Member & Apache Royale PMC *Apache Software Foundation* http://about.me/carlosrovira
