Yeah - Actually I think we need to look more holistically at the packaging, archetypes, samples and website.
Maybe before doing anything we can starting laying out how we can structure the components, documentation and make the website a little more structured, so that you can choose a route through the product/samples/documentation. I was thinking something like a front page that says "I want to set-up Apache ServiceMix to integrate applications" "I want to use Apache ServiceMix components in my Web Application" "I want to add integration functionality to my messaging architecture" "I want to start building processes using choreography and Apache ServiceMix" Then each would take you through not only the packaging for you, but also the archetypes and the samples. I know its a big picture thing - but I have always found its best to envisage the goal while we plan the projects. P On 7/22/06, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think this is the best way. We need to rewrite the examples using the archetypes and it will also provide nice tutorials (we miss them a lot). Cheers, Guillaume Nodet On 7/23/06, Philip Dodds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > True, and I think a mix of samples and archetypes would be good. > > What I was thinking was if the samples where completed archetypes - > ie. for > a loan broker or something you have 3-4 archetypes and are completed with > the "business" requirements. Thus giving people the completed picture, > and > allowing them the basis for building it. > > P > > On 7/22/06, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I do agree. > > However, I' m still not sure if archetype can completely replace > samples. > > I guess they can if they can show something usefull, but will it be the > > case > > for all archetypes ? > > > > Cheers, > > Guillaume Nodet > > > > On 7/23/06, Philip Dodds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > We need to look at the examples and assign a package pre-req for > > them, on > > > the web app note I'm starting to wonder whether providing ServiceMix > in > > a > > > WAR would be better made into a archetype than a project - something > > that > > > someone can create a basic web-app framework (smx set-up inside) for > > use? > > > > > > P > > > > > > On 7/22/06, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > +1 for several distributions. > > > > > > > > However I see several problems: > > > > * where to put the samples: some use the standard JBI deployment > (SU > > + > > > > SA) > > > > and other > > > > only use a static spring configuration with lightweight components. > > > > * we need to provide a clean documentation about integration > styles: > > > > servicemix standalone, in a web app, embedded so that users can > > > choose > > > > the needed distribution > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 7/18/06, Philip Dodds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I have been thinking over the restructuring that we have been > > > discussing > > > > > and > > > > > I'm wondering whether we should look at create a couple of > flavours > > of > > > > > distribution, so that in place of a big install we have: > > > > > > > > > > Server - Just the Core Server (no components) > > > > > Server/Components - Core Server and Components > > > > > Geronimo Package - Core Server with everything needed to deploy to > > > > > geronimo > > > > > > > > > > > > For the Geronimo package, I think that a Geronimo plugin would be > the > > > best > > > > way to do that, > > > > as Aaron pointed in another thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > JBoss Package (off-site) - Core Server with everything needed to > > deploy > > > to > > > > > JBoss > > > > > Components - Just the components > > > > > > > > > > Also I'm wondering whether we should look at the archetypes as a > way > > > to > > > > > offer the functionality such as: > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Guillaume Nodet > > > > > > > > ServiceMix Embedded in a Web Application > > > > > ServiceMix Embedded in a simple Application > > > > > ServiceMix Embedding with Spring > > > > > > > > > > I have been adding archetypes to get things started for the > > components > > > > we > > > > > have now and intend to continue with that. > > > > > > > > > > Also I'm thinking we could fix up the lwcontainers (I'm getting to > > it) > > > > and > > > > > then create archetypes for each of the components so that we are > > able > > > to > > > > > provide a little bit of quick start information. > > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > > > Philip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
