[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1552?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16030990#comment-16030990
]
Jorge Bay commented on TINKERPOP-1552:
--------------------------------------
[~Jesse Carter] nice! I think that quote from the docs settles the discussion
on naming conventions!
More about naming: The module is called {{gremlin-dotnet}}, 2 root namespaces:
{{Gremlin.CSharp}} and {{Gremlin.Net}}.
Can we use a single identifier for the module, project, root namespace and
nuget package name? csharp / dotnet / net.
Something like gremlin-csharp, with the following namespace structure:
{{Gremlin.CSharp.Driver}}, {{Gremlin.CSharp.Process}} and
{{Gremlin.CSharp.Structure}}? similar to the python GLV.
I'll try to send a pull request against TINKERPOP-1552 branch containing the
generic interfaces and some other minor fixes, like fix [casing of the
generated
enums|https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/blob/bdb21f2d0a0bcaac62c392bc779aae635673313d/gremlin-dotnet/src/Gremlin.CSharp/Process/Scope.cs#L28].
[~Florian Hockmann] again, great work!
> C# Gremlin Language Variant
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP-1552
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1552
> Project: TinkerPop
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: language-variant
> Affects Versions: 3.2.3
> Reporter: Jorge Bay
> Assignee: stephen mallette
>
> It would be nice to have a C# GLV that runs under .NET Framework 4.5+ and
> .NET Core.
> The maven build could use the Exec Maven Plugin to exec .NET Core's [dotnet
> test|https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#macos] command.
> Some requirements, from the mailing list (edited):
> {quote}
> 1. The GLV should keep in line with class/method names of the java API
> where possible to ensure consistency of feel across languages.
> 2. There needs to be adequate tests (we're still discussing the approach to
> testing GLVs and i think that needs to be tackled sooner than later as more
> GLVs start to come in). Those tests should produce xunit style output
> unless there is some good reason not to.
> 3. There needs to be adequate documentation (e.g. Reference docs)
> 4. The build/deploy process needs to be bound to maven which might be one of
> the trickier bits to deal with.
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
