Let's move on ! On 7/27/06, Philip Dodds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I agree that we probably want to break the layout / distribution and documentation up, and I like the idea of a Spring-like User Guide. If everyone is ok with it I'd like to start a page on the wiki regarding possible new SVN structure, a page on builds. As for the user guide I've found the best way to start those is to create an index page and start organizing that then people can take bits out as they see fit to fill them in. P On 7/26/06, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 7/23/06, Philip Dodds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > 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. > > > Don't you think we can handle svn layout / distributions and documentation > separatly ? > IMHO, they are quite independant things and it would be easier to discuss. > > 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. > > > Don't you think it will be difficult not to be redundant in > these sections > ? > I would have thought about a User Guide a la spring. > > Cheers, > Guillaume Nodet > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
-- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet
