[aerogear-dev] AeroGear project structure and the website

[Matthias Wessendorf]

On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Jay Balunas <jbalunas at redhat.com> wrote:

>
> On Feb 20, 2014, at 12:06 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno at 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!
>

it looks brilliant!


>
>
> --
> abstractj
>
> On February 20, 2014 at 11:06:34 AM, Hylke Bons (hbons at 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.
>


Not sure - I guess both;

If I need a sync client, I ususally have a client platform already in mind,
rather than just looking for sync.

I'd be looking for "iOS sync"



>
> 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/aerogear-modules.png
> .
>
>
> One solution might be:
>
> https://raw2.github.com/hbons/aerogear-design/master/website-restructure/aerogear-modules.png
> 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 at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20140224/b019171d/attachment.html