How to handle multiple class tutorials, wiki storage?

As has been pointed out by @nehon and others the wiki needs to expand beyond single class implementations for tutorials.

With single class examples, the wiki has been almost exclusively linking to java files stored in the engine archives. At most, including 2 or 3 java classes inside the tutorial itself.

For more complex examples this is not going to work so I would like to have input on where and how to store the more complex examples. For starters, I am about to complete the jme3AI tutorial which has 9 classes to demonstrate its use.

Placing them in a Zip file and uploading them to the resources folder makes the most sense to me for many reasons but the main reason being it keeps the wiki content control with the core team as it is now.

However, storing them in the wiki archive could eat up a lot of space if they contained assets so that’s a drawback.

I could also restructure the resource folder to be the same as the asciidoc folder to keep things in sync.

I would like some input from others on the best way to handle the storage of the more complex tutorial assets.

2 Likes

Is there a way we can just link to them in git or something?

To me it should be a separate github repo with a project containing all the example.
You would have just to link the package where the example is implemented, and maybe have a readme in the project to explain how to run the examples.

2 Likes

I thought about github but the main problem is if the person who wrote the tutorial abandons their interest in jmonkey and closes out their repo then what?

Also, there would be no way to update the files without their permission.

A prime example is the Normen videos and code explaining the sdk.

right now the wiki is also done using github. Just put the examples on the same account as whatever JME and the wiki use and that solves most problems.

The only thing that it doesn’t solve is that changing the code examples need a pull request but considering that the wiki also works that way already and that it is probably a good idea to have code examples be reviewed first makes it at least in my opinion a non-issue

well no… I mean a repo in the jmonkeyengine organisation like jmonkeyengine/doc-examples or something like that
I’d give you commit access and anyone updating the docs lately

1 Like

I see, that makes sense.[quote=“nehon, post:3, topic:39225”]
You would have just to link the package where the example is implemented
[/quote]

By package you mean folder on github right? Everything should be zipped or jar in the folder?

no a java package, with the source code inside like this
jmonkeyengine/jme3-core/src/main/java/com/jme3/effect at master · jMonkeyEngine/jmonkeyengine · GitHub
This links to the com.jme3.effect package.
This way you just have to make your example work in the project, commit / push and just grab the link
The nice part is also that you can fix/update the code without re packaging a zip or whatever.

For consistency, what would be best for package names,
jme3Test
indicates its in the test package of the engine and all examples are single class there.

com.jme3.

would indicate engine itself I would think.

com.jme3.examples sounds good to me

Ok to me to.

For setting this up should I do it and transfer owner or do you do it and add everyone?

I’ll do it. Please ping me back if I didn’t in 12 hours, I’m going to bed now :wink: