[aerogear-dev] [ag-controller] Deprecating AeroGear-Controller

Rodney Russ rruss at redhat.com
Mon Jun 10 15:37:27 EDT 2013 

Sebastien, 

Does this affect the Aerogear scaffolding plugin in Forge? 

-Rodney 

----- Original Message -----

> To be honest, I'm not sure it's relevant to make the distinction between
> Controller with or without REST support. We are in 2013, I'm not using the
> Controller to render JSPs, especially not in a mobile scope with our Front
> End libraries which are REST focused. I was using the controller because I
> could describe with a fluent API my (rest) routes and integrate seamlessly
> my security concerns.

> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:15 AM, Daniel Bevenius < daniel.bevenius at gmail.com
> > wrote:

> > > I think a combination of this e-mail and parts of Dan's would have been
> > > nice before we got an e-mail stating that the deprecation was happening
> > > and asking how we should go about it.
> 
> > I'm to blame for this not being as open as it probably could have. The line
> > of what is public and what in internal was a little blurred, and I opted to
> > be careful, so the discussions have been mostly over private channels.
> 

> > > The concern I have with leaving the REST bits as they are is confusion in
> > > what should be used, and when. If we're not going to be enhancing the
> > > REST
> > > support, we should deprecate it imo.
> 
> > I agree with this.
> 

> > On 10 June 2013 05:07, Kris Borchers < kris at redhat.com > wrote:
> 

> > > Though I am mostly on board with the idea of deprecating the REST bits of
> > > controller, I guess what I'm trying to figure out is when this was
> > > decided.
> > > I heard some passing mentions of controller getting beyond its initial
> > > scope, etc. but a discussion around deprecation/removal never happened
> > > that
> > > I am aware of. I think a combination of this e-mail and parts of Dan's
> > > would
> > > have been nice before we got an e-mail stating that the deprecation was
> > > happening and asking how we should go about it.
> > 
> 

> > > On Jun 9, 2013, at 10:01 PM, Jay Balunas < jbalunas at redhat.com > wrote:
> > 
> 

> > > > Some of my thoughts:
> > > 
> > 
> 

> > > > The concern I have with leaving the REST bits as they are is confusion
> > > > in
> > > > what should be used, and when. If we're not going to be enhancing the
> > > > REST
> > > > support, we should deprecate it imo.
> > > 
> > 
> 

> > > > If the controller's MVC functionality is going to move forward (i.e.
> > > > not
> > > > be
> > > > deprecated) we should plan for its future carefully so that it works
> > > > well
> > > > with the REST support provided by JAX-RS /RESTEasy. I'm just not sure
> > > > of
> > > > the
> > > > priority over other things atm. So it might be the type of thing where
> > > > we
> > > > take it where we can, and see if there is community interest in moving
> > > > it
> > > > forward.
> > > 
> > 
> 

> > > > I certainly would like to see a solid MVC be standardized in EE(X), and
> > > > it
> > > > might be in the future. However, there are a lot of different mvc
> > > > frameworks
> > > > out there and I'm concerned over trying to create another, especially
> > > > if
> > > > it
> > > > seems our functionality is tied to it.
> > > 
> > 
> 

> > > > Either way, we should update our examples to show how to use our
> > > > technology
> > > > with RESTEasy, with or without the controller and/or other mvc options.
> > > > So
> > > > that users know they have options here.
> > > 
> > 
> 

> > > > On Jun 9, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Kris Borchers wrote:
> > > 
> > 
> 

> > > > > 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 AeroGear.org and
> > > > > only
> > > > > talk
> > > > > about our other server side bits.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 

> > > > > On Jun 9, 2013, at 9:03, Bruno Oliveira < bruno at 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 at 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 at lists.jboss.org
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> > > > > > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 

> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> > > > > > aerogear-dev mailing list
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> > > > > > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> > > > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> > > > > aerogear-dev mailing list
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> > > > > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> > > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > 
> > 
> 
> > > > aerogear-dev mailing list
> > > 
> > 
> 
> > > > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > > 
> > 
> 
> > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
> > > 
> > 
> 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > 
> 
> > > aerogear-dev mailing list
> > 
> 
> > > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > 
> 
> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
> > 
> 

> > _______________________________________________
> 
> > aerogear-dev mailing list
> 
> > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> 
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
> 

> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20130610/844e5254/attachment-0001.html

More information about the aerogear-dev mailing list