Repo Setup

[DWiechert]

Similar, but not exactly the same, as the original projects repo, I think we should have many and plentiful READMEs.

The part I like about the original repo is that each "type" of project/script has it's own folder (e.g. Databases). And within each of these project folders there are READMEs with all of the projects that pertain to that folder. I think this is a very nice way to setup the repo and we should continue down that path. Maybe, even make each project in the README a link so that way the user can easily link to their solution once they solve the problem.

The part that I don't like about the original repo is that the main README has ALL of the problems on it even though the individual READMEs also define them. I think on our main README we should just have links to the individual project's README. This way the front page of the repo is not as cluttered as the original one and a user can quickly get to the README for the specific area they want to solve problems in.

[jbranchaud]

I was thinking along the same lines. One of my thoughts was which I am still thinking through is to organize it all like this:

projects
+-- README.md
+-- text/
|   +-- README.md
|   +-- reverse-large-file/
|   |   +-- README.md
|   +-- word-count/
|   |   +-- README.md
|   +-- another-project/
|       +-- README.md
+-- numbers/
|   +-- README.md
|   +-- prime-factorization/
|   |   +-- README.md
| etc...

The idea is that there is a folder for each project so that the solution can be implemented with multiple files if needed and the README for each project will have the full description (which we are writing in the issues) as opposed to just the base descriptions that will appear in README for the category.

Thoughts?

[DWiechert]

Ok, that makes sense. I like the idea of the separate folder per problem because not only could one language take multiple files, but one might do each problem in multiple languages. This keeps it nice and orderly.