The Demos in Forge projects take up a TON of SUs/AOs. But if you delete the demos after installing, the next time you upgrade the component you get the demo code again.
Solution: have the component author upload a demo (OAP, OML, or OSP) separately from the component itself (OAP, OML, OSP, or XIF). Then allow the Forge user a choice of "Download Component Only" or "Download Component + Demo".
To make this better, add a "Project" that is similar to an OSP, but can contain Applications as well. That way, the Demo can be a separate Application from the Component, and they can be delivered together in one download. A level above "Application" has been requested a few times already.
J.Ja
Must have
Agreed.
I would like to keep the "external" components untocuhed, so you can upgared far more easily (instead of force installs etc)
so, yes, demo-stuff should be somewhere else
With this discussion (link) about having a separate Demo component for the SortRecordList component, it would be very helpful if OutSystems would implement the functionality to have in the a component:
1) one download for the component itself,
2) and a second download only for a demo on how to use the component.
Cheers,
Tiago Bernardo
I agree, not sure how it should be implemented correctly, but we really need components as is and some demo-site
Having the Demo example eSpace on the same application it will lead to the demo espace to be moved from one environment (QA, PRD) whenever the application is promoted.
Removing the eSapce on DEV does not go the trick since when a new version is uploaded the eSpace will be there again.
Agreed,
this should be better in all ways.
we like the demos, but do not like them in our environments :)
I agree with this to some extent.
Having demo eSpaces out of the application is a good idea, but I'm not seeing people downloading two different apps/modules just to see how it works. For this, I believe that there is a simple and a complex solution.
The simple? When deploying via lifetime, do a custom deployment and check only non-demo eSpaces.
The complex? Allow an eSpace-level configuration like "Is Demo eSpace". This would mean that deployments won't consider these eSpaces as well as Service Studio would not allow these eSpaces to appear on the References pane (to be referenced, of course).
Still a good idea, though.
I agreed.
Also demo screen should not be counted in AOs.
Agreed, this is a pain.
IMO the best practice push should be:
I'd actually go further and do a slight overhaul of the Forge by simply:
This way we don't need to change anything in the concept of an eSpace Module, just on the Forge itself (and educating the community).
If the Demo is a different Application altogether, I wouldn't be too concerned with AOs, as IIRC they are not enforced on the Development environment
Hi Pedro and Followers,
During this and next quarter, we will work hard to grow the forge into a marketplace of high-quality components.
We will:
So I have set the status to “Working on it”. We expect it to be ready during Q3. I’ll post an update once it’s done!
Cheers
Ana Sequeira
I know this is already being worked on but an alternative way to do this is to allow an espace to be flagged as do not move or migrate past a certain environment. Often we create demo and test espaces which would be nice to keep together in the correct application but have the publish between environments ignore the espace if the flag is set. Extra points if the flag could be set so that publishing worked between environments flagged as development but not production.
I have seen many projects in which we need to pay special attention to the applications consumed by the applications.
Usually, we add many applications / components from forge where some modules are just example, or sometime we create some modules to be a sandbox only and we do not want to publish it on PROD.
If we have a new property in the module to indicate that we do not want to publish it in PROD anyway, could be really usefully to help us manger better the consumed objects applications.
The underlying problem is that the Component maker is forced to include the samples in the same package as the actual code. The solution is to have the examples separated from the component itself.
Hi Justin
we are working on that idea: have the component author upload a demo (OAP, OML, or OSP) separately from the component itself (OAP, OML, OSP, or XIF). Then allow the Forge user a choice of "Download Component Only" or "Download Component + Demo".
Yaaay!
Hi Justin and fellows
this idea was implemented in the publishing a new component workflow.
Ana