Clarify naming and packaging

[pforhan]

You'll probably want a readme.md at the very least to guide people to the interesting bits of the code, but I think you may also want to rename the main application class (which ends in Controller and blows my mind every time) and restructure the project a bit.

Specifically, consider keeping all the related classes in the same package. That would boost readability by quite a bit. and mirrors a typical application.

[imminent]

Hmm, @pforhan just saw this for the first time today. I guess it's not too easy to automatically see issues on your own repositories (that's new for me). Yeah, I grouped things by being the same type of component, but it would be easier to find the Controller for a Presentation if they were next to each other. From this example I created a library, Prestige, that defines the annotations and using code-gen to glue them together, but how I initially have it implemented requires them to be grouped by package which allows package-protected implementations provided by Dagger Modules. Anyways, I'm exploring Flow & Mortar, and might figure out a better way to do it.

[pforhan]

I can only barely remember writing this at this point. 😉

Flow and mortar seem really promising, but they are still in progress. I'd like to see a simplification that eliminates one package or the other...

[imminent]

I can imagine so, that's almost a year old now.
On Mar 3, 2014 9:41 AM, "Patrick Forhan" notifications@github.com wrote:

I can only barely remember writing this at this point. [image: 😉]

Flow and mortar seem really promising, but they are still in progress. I'd
like to see a simplification that eliminates one package or the other...

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/1#issuecomment-36536068
.