[evla-sw-discuss] code organization

[Rich Moeser]

Bryan Butler wrote:
>
> but i will enforce uniformity in those higher layers, however we decide is the 
> best way to do it.
>
> and we haven't really even touched on the higher level organization, which, as i 
> mentioned before, is more important in my opinion.  can we get rid of the "e2e" 
> that we have now?  what to do about "commons"?  etc.
>   
Currently the structure of the higher layers is as follows:

NRAO (root directory)
            -> COMMONS (this contains reusable classes that can be used 
by any project and by non-nrao developers, AngleFormat, AstroDate, 
MathLib, and Util)
            -> EVLA
                           -> OBSERVE
                           -> TRANSITION
                           -> ARCHIVE
                           -> COMMONS (reusable components and static 
classes that only EVLA projects would use)
                           ....etc, etc, etc
            -> VLA
                           ->JOBSERVE
            -> VLBA
                            -> OMS
                           -> VLCj
            -> E2E (this would be SSS)
                            -> PST
                            -> VOSERVER

I'm quite satisfied with this directory structure. It's simple, natural 
and difficult to get lost in. The root directory NRAO might seem a bit 
unnecessary but it allows for other roots such as VENDOR, DRAO, or 
whatever. I would probably change the COMMONS so that several types of 
commons projects can exist. For example the EVLA project could have 
COMMONS-UTIL (utility classes used exclusively by evla) and COMMONS-NET 
(evla communications and network classes). (And, yes, I think the term 
"commons" should be kept, indicating a collection of general purpose 
classes.)

I think E2E should be replaced with SSS and remain a subdirectory of NRAO.

--Rich