[evla-sw-discuss] code organization

[Kevin Ryan]

Our software will eventually be in the public domain and there is  
increased talk of sharing amongst other NRAO units.  We should keep  
that in mind.

IMHO, directory structure should reflect the hierarchy of the  
software itself not what language it was written in or what tool it  
was compiled with.  Tools such as Maven should work to serve our  
needs, not the other way around.

Keep the structure as simple as possible without being ambiguous; use  
precise, descriptive, meaningful names:

nrao/evla/amcs/VlaAntenna.java

Maven's new recommended structure has words like 'main' that, like  
the word 'commons', do not provide a precise description of that path.

VlaAntenna.java under our current Maven system is bad:

NRAO/EVLA/CMP/src/java/edu/nrao/evla/amcs/cmp/VlaAntenna.java

That structure has redundancies in it adding to its already long  
depth.  The word 'cmp' is my fault; it is the processor that  
VlaAntenna might've run in.  A person searching the hierarchy for  
VlaAntenna should know that it is part of the AMCS of the EVLA of  
NRAO but should not have to know the name of the processor that it  
might run in or the language that it was written in in order to find  
it in our source repository.

Kevin

On Oct 25, 2006, at 1:28 PM, Rich Moeser wrote:

> If we are sticking with Maven - I see no reason not to - then I  
> suggest
> we follow their recommended directory layout which is described at
> http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-the- 
> standard-directory-layout.html.
> It's slightly different than what the Maven folks recommended in  
> Maven 1.x.
>
> --Rich
>
>
> Stephan Witz wrote:
>> This is to kick off discussions about the organization of our  
>> software,
>> by which I mean the layout of the repository and the build mechanism:
>> we've been talking about moving from maven 1.0 to 2.something, and  
>> from
>> cvs to subversion, and if we do such a thing, now is the best time to
>> address the current directory structure of our projects: what the  
>> layout
>> of the repository is and where each chunk of what we have will go.
>>
>> You have opinions, share them. We have a couple of weeks to make  
>> noise
>> at each other before the new repository is setup and ready for us  
>> to start
>> porting things over to it. Once we start that process I really  
>> don't want
>> to have to backtrack and rework the layout.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> evla-sw-discuss mailing list
>> evla-sw-discuss at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
>> http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evla-sw-discuss
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> evla-sw-discuss mailing list
> evla-sw-discuss at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
> http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evla-sw-discuss