I'm not sure deprecation is necessary but I would vote with Bruno to just leave the
REST bits as is and ensure nothing else depends on them. Then we just make a note in the
README that we have discontinued development and support on them. Then remove any
references from
and only talk about our other server side bits.
On Jun 9, 2013, at 9:03, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org> wrote:
Ok, I almost had a heart attack here :) I'd say leave the REST
bits as is and give to people a choice.
-
abstractj
On Jun 9, 2013, 10:57 AM, Daniel Bevenius wrote:
> >Deprecate?! Why?! Do we have a lightweight MVC to replace?
> I should have written, deprecate the RESTful part of AeroGear controller, as this is
really what has been discussed.
> If it makes sense to keep the MVC parts we can certainly do that.
>
>
>
>
> On 9 June 2013 15:51, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org> wrote:
>> Aloha Daniel,
>>
>>
>>> So how do we make it visible that we have deprecated AeroGear-Controller?
>>
>> Deprecate?! Why?! Do we have a lightweight MVC to replace?
>>
>> -
>> abstractj
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 9, 2013, 8:25 AM, Daniel Bevenius wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>
>>> Originally, AeroGear Controller was an MVC only implementation, where
requests could be forwarded to different types of views. Later we added support for
RESTful endpoints which was very basic to start with, but more and more feature requests
have come which is the reason for creating this email.
>>>
>>> We did not set out to implement the RESTful support our selves, instead the
goal was to use RestEasy but as we required to be able to programmatically add endpoints
which was not an option at the time (but support for this does now exist in RestEasy).
>>>
>>> AeroGear controller's REST support started out very simple but as time
passed more request for things that are taken for granted in a JAX-RS implementation were
being asked for. We were moving toward something equivalent to a JAX-RS implementation
with regards to what we supported. Adding more of these features added to the complexity
of the Controller as we needed to figure out good ways to provide the features requested,
and this also brings up the question if we should be doing this. The controller is not
specific to mobil, as any backend can be used with the client SDKs. Also, there are plenty
of options to implement RESTful backends, in Java using RestEasy for example, or in a
different language.
>>>
>>> And after some discussions it has been decided that we should focus are
efforts in other places when it comes to our server side offerings, for example the
Unified Push Server and SimplePush Server etc.
>>>
>>> So how do we make it visible that we have deprecated AeroGear-Controller?
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> A clear notice in the README.md is a good start. Should we mark every
class as deprecated as well?
>>>
>>>
>>>> These are just suggestions and if you have other ideas please let us
know.
>>>
>>> /Dan
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev