coapp-developers team mailing list archive

["Rudolf Grauberger" <r.grauberger@xxxxxxxxx>]

I had thought about the arguments of Tim Procter and I must say that I would
have the policy directory a bit more flexible. On my own system I install
every application on a separate device (like D:\Programs... or
F:\Programs...) because I haven't enough disk space on the primary/operation
system device.

I find that the user can set the CoApp base directory (that includes the
bin, lib etc. directories) on an any device.

Whether it needs install more than one instance of an application, can I not
say.

Rudolf Grauberger

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: coapp-developers-bounces+r.grauberger=online.de@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:coapp-developers-bounces+r.grauberger=online.de@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Im Auftrag von Timothy Procter
Gesendet: Freitag, 16. April 2010 04:47
An: coapp-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: [Coapp-developers] Strictness of the Directory Structure

I'm fairly new to this mailing list, so maybe this has already been
discussed, but I'm a bit concerned that we're being too strict with the
directory locations.

There absolutely needs to be a well thought out standard for where
everything goes. This should be the default behaviour for any use of the
tool. Otherwise, we quickly evolve into chaos with every developer or user
choosing a different alternative that becomes very difficult to manage.

The caution is that there are always edge cases were you need something a
little different. There should be some way to allow non-default behaviour.
Otherwise we're quickly limiting the use of the tool for certain
applications.

For example, I may need to install more than one of the same application on
a system in different locations. Or, I may want to have a third-party
application bundled with one I'm distributing, and deliberately keep it
segregated from anything else that might happen on the environment. This is
a common practice for highly sensitive production servers.

Internally, using 'lib','bin','doc', etc works for most implementations. 
But sometimes an application warrants something else. The developer should
be able to modify the defaults if needed.

I like what I've seen so far for suggestions regarding a standard, but if
there's no flexibility, we'll be turning people away.

Appreciate any feedback,
Tim Procter

--
Look for Paul & Alex at Collaborate 2010 presenting "Worst Practices of IT
Outsourcing". To meet with either, send a note to events@xxxxxxxxxxx



_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
Post to     : coapp-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp