Obviously the paths would change based on where they actually live and since I want this to live outside of an individual user, pointing to the user paths would make no sense in a production case.
Also on WSL, if you go into /mnt you can get a list of all of the disks that are mounted on your Workstation/Server.
In the case of my workstation I only have the 1 disk, so only c is listed. Severs would likely have other drives.
@scottalanmiller not so limited. I do both linux and win devel. Win in vm is a pita so you run win bare metal and use linux in vm. Then you grown bored of setting up samba for sharing between vm and host, fire the vm on 1 screen and have another os in the other screen and so on. Now I just fire wsl from win menu and I go. It is simply more seamless to me.
When you say you develop on both, you develop the same things on both, or different things on both?
I share between systems via GIT.
No I've customers asking for linux stuff and other customers asking for win stuff.
What causes the need for the Samba shares between them, then? Seems like you'd just keep them disconnected.
While all end in a git service (bitbucket) having code sparse in 2 machines and duplicated tools is not something I like. So I prefer to keep eveything in 1 place use 1 editor and share sources/compiled code to run it. With wsl this is smooth and fast. Not having to devel for win would be a big win.
What I don't understand is why people use Mac OSX for development or why WSL would be nice. In both cases I feel like people want Linux but just aren't using it. Why not? If you want Linux, why not work on Linux?
For me personally I have used all 3 platforms and for me, I like the Mac for the Host as it seems to be the most user friendly, everything just works, and I can focus on the task at hand OS. I then run VM's for Windows and Linux on top for whatever I need to get done. I like the hardware, I like the OS, I love the gestures on the mouse pad, and I like the 8hour battery life.