Already +101 then ;-)

Sorry Alberto, I think I then misunderstood your mail from March - I
though you had in mind to create a client-side DataContext that would
absorb a(ny) REST interface. Hence I was a bit like "that's nearly
impossible" in my response. But great that we had the same ideas then!

Regarding where to place it... Somehow I feel a bit like making it
part of MetaModel because I do think that our "brand" needs to be
enforced and we should avoid diluting the attention to MetaModel. But
a marketing person might tell us the opposite is better, I don't know
:-)

I have a bit of code lying around for something like this, back from
when I was doing my talk at ApacheCon in Budapest. It's probably not
going to be what I'd like to contribute, but I will anyway take a look
if some of it can be reused.

Anyone wants to give a shot at making an Swagger file for API discussion?

2016-05-23 23:48 GMT-07:00 Du Krøger, Dennis
<[email protected]>:
> Sounds like an amazing idea!
>
> How would/should it fit into MetaModel? Part of the actual project or as a 
> subproject? I wouldn't really mind it as a part of MetaModel itself, but I 
> think it might be better as a subproject, since it is a little bit out of 
> scope for MM itself.
>
> BR,
> Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alberto Rodriguez [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 24. maj 2016 08:27
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] A MetaModel service/app
>
> Hi Kasper,
>
> this is a great idea and is somehow related to the email I sent in March 
> suggesting the creation of an API REST module. I think this make a lot of 
> sense and as you said we would reach a much wider community.
>
> So...+100 from me ;)
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Alberto
>
> 2016-05-24 5:07 GMT+02:00 Kasper Sørensen <[email protected]>:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I want to share an idea and ask if you think it's something that we
>> should add to MetaModel.
>>
>> I've been having the idea of making a webapp for centralized data
>> management and federation, based on MetaModel. It would host a set of
>> RESTful services for registering a datastore and for querying them.
>> Potentially also for updating them.
>>
>> By registering data you would be able to either register connection
>> information, or simply upload the data and thereby build a new set of
>> data to be queried. The datastores would have an identifier and would
>> then be queryable by using that identifier. For example, if the
>> datastore ID was "myds" then I might access it's schema like this:
>>
>> http://hostname/myds/schemas
>>
>> And say if it then had schema "PUBLIC" then tables could be accessed a la:
>>
>> http://hostname/myds/schemas/PUBLIC/tables
>>
>> and so on...
>> Queries could be fired like this:
>>
>> http://hostname/myds/query?sql=SELECT+foo+FROM+mytable
>>
>> All of this could be built quite easily IMO, and more importantly
>> uniformly, using MetaModel.
>>
>> I think also updates would/should be possible, although I didn't think
>> a lot yet about the interface.
>>
>> I have faced this need from time to time where different pieces of a
>> large architecture all need access to the same data. And if those
>> pieces are not built using the same technology stack, it becomes hard
>> to share data - except if you pass all the data around between
>> services. My idea here was to be able to just pass around a datastore
>> identifier and thus let different services all access the same data.
>>
>> From a community perspective, I think this may also help MetaModel a
>> lot. I have faced many situations where people not coding in Java say
>> "that's really cool, but it doesn't work with my
>> [.NET/Python/whatever] stack". If we would offer "MetaModel as a
>> service" then I think our reach would be a lot wider. Furthermore I
>> think we should then offer MetaModel as a Docker image and thereby
>> make it a lot easier for people to quickly try it out and so on.
>>
>> What do you all think?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Kasper
>>

Reply via email to