abdera-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dan Diephouse <dan.diepho...@mulesource.com>
Subject Re: FeedServer Review
Date Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:51:04 GMT

David Primmer wrote:
> I'll let Jun and Vasu respond in more detail later, but my general
> impression of your comments is that they are not valuing the use case
> that we were considering; namely that we wanted to make it easier to
> produce an Atom interface to existing data sources that probably have
> their own interface and accompanying local human administrative
> expertise. We wanted to take the specifics of the Atom protocol out of
> way of the dev in the same way that a high-level ORM can hide the
> implementer from having to do SQL. That way, the user of the library
> can focus on adapting the data sources and providing a read-write rest
> web service.
>
>   
Great, I think this is a very valuable use case.

What I'm confused about is why we need a new mechanism to do this. I 
already went through and provided an example of how the 
CollectionProvider can support both your needs and general developer 
requirements.

Can you please provide some concrete examples of why the CP code cannot 
be used or why the Adapter approach is easier to use? I roughly 
understand what you're saying about how you're trying to focus on 
adapting data sources, but I still don't see why this can't be done with 
the CP code and why we need a completely new implementation/paradigm to 
do it. 

Would you be opposed to writing a AbstractDataSourceCollectionProvider? 
(I don't really care that much about naming, but hopefully its clear 
what I mean from the context). This would work with the existing 
ServiceProvider, reuse the existing approach and provide you with the 
interface you want.
>  If you're coding
> the whole thing from scratch and agnostic to back-end storage format,
> Adapter seems like a dumb name.
>   
I never said it sounded dumb. I said it just wasn't consistent. I too am 
not a huge fan of the *Provider naming, but thats a rabbit hole that we 
can revisit later as its really not as important as the interfaces for 
interacting with the system.

- Dan

-- 
Dan Diephouse
MuleSource
http://mulesource.com | http://netzooid.com/blog


Mime
View raw message