Recently I advocated the use of OGP as an installer function for code distributed with the LAVA CR.

Now I would start the discussion where to put these items.

My preference is:
user.lib\_LAVACR\_Controls\%Name of the Control
user.lib\_LAVACR\_XNodes\%Name of the XNode
user.lib\_LAVACR\_Code\%Name of the submission

Does anyone have other ideas?

Ton

I don't really think we should limit or even suggest where people should install their LAVAcr downloads by default - the LAVAcr is a repository of code snippets, and not really an organised tool repository. That's just my - what do others think?

I tend to store them in a separate directory anyway (but not in user.lib at this time)
maybe the advantage would be that it's easier to link to other contributions ("this CR-snippet requires that-and-that snippet")

That's exactly what I mean some of the codes are more like a tool (the XControl Hierarchy, the XNode manager) and are stand alone items.
Others like the Scripting tools, Active directory tools, Get Data from clipboard and the Tree Control are more like an API and can be directly called from other code.
The usability will be greater if there is an advised location, such as if you want this snippet to run fluently install that snippet with there (or use that .OGP file).
And I don't to turn my harddrive into a toolbox I can only control with Google desktop to find items. So I started this discussion.

Ton

Firstly, I'd support having a recommended standard location -but then I'm one of the guilty parties who is submitting code that relies on other code repository code. I'd rather hope that code repository wasn't just a place for snippets but there is clearly some overlap with OpenG when we start having significant packages of code in the code repository. In terms of layout - why not use the heirarchy that already exists in the code repository catagories ? Hence, user.lib\_LAVACR\Rusty nails\XNodes\... etc

I had a feeling that the LabVIEW linker works with relative paths ? If so, that would mean that the code repository "root directory" could be moved around would it not ?