Re: [aerogear-dev] AeroGear project structure and the website
On Feb 20, 2014, at 12:06 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org> wrote:
Hylke amazing work, I can’t wait to see it in production.
+1 Hylke - good stuff, and a lot to get through!
--
abstractj
On February 20, 2014 at 11:06:34 AM, Hylke Bons (hbons(a)redhat.com) wrote:
>
> TL;DR: The most important questions that we need to answer are
> these:
> - "If I download a library on one platform, what must I download
> to use
> the same features on an other platform?"
I like this approach. I'd rather be feature driven than library driven. I think most
yours will be looking for what we can do for them before looking at what native libs we
provide.
Lets get this breakdown together for Hylke - using the eitherpad or a gist seems the best
approach here.
> -"Is this a part I use on the client, or on the server
side?”
Not sure if I understood your question correctly, but to get the full solution, you need
to download both
I think he means for each feature is there a client and a server part and if so how do we
offer them. Then we can get the info and links for the solution in one place. Hylke - is
that it or something else?
> -"What do we mean when talking about different AeroGear
> subprojects/modules?”
By subprojects I understand as exactly like you did at
https://raw2.github.com/hbons/aerogear-design/master/website-restructure/....
>
> One solution might be:
>
https://raw2.github.com/hbons/aerogear-design/master/website-restructure/...
> I've made a lot of assumptions here, and it might not work, but
> I'd like
> to hear your thoughts on it.
>
> It would clarify a lot if we could harmonise the different downloads
> across platforms, either by providing single download solutions
> or
> splitting everything up and naming all the parts consistently.
> I'm
> interested in what the technical issues might be, as I wasn't
> around
> when most of these decisions were made, or I simply missed them.
>
> Thoughts or other ideas? :)
I don’t have any idea, because I liked the way how it was organized. No disagreement
here.
+1 keep up the good work!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Hylke
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
Attachments:
- attachment.html (text/html — 5.4 KB)