I agree with Luca on this one.  I think "eating our own dog-food" is the
surest and best way to properly develop and constantly test the REST
api.  Plus it puts all gui's on a level playing field.

FlexJSON + the config back-end + REST for configuration would seem to
allow everyone to just get on with developing the core engine, while
letting folks who want to do the front-end work figure out the best way
to do that...and keep it seperate.

--saul


On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 11:21 -0700, Jody Garnett wrote:
> Jody Garnett wrote:
> >> Well the way I see it going is that the rest stuff will be rewritten 
> >> against the new configuration classes. I dont think it will be too much 
> >> to switch over... and we can still keep the rest of the code base 
> >> againast the old model... and things will still be in sync.  
> >>     
> > I like that plan - make only the new config model available via the REST 
> > API.  It gets the new config model some time in front of developers and 
> > gives us a real motivation to switch the remaining modules over (ie so they 
> > can be seen by programmers that 
> > are using the REST API).
> >   
> I have been talking this over with a co-worker (Martin Davis - perhaps 
> you have heard of him). He had a couple ideas, one of which is bad but I 
> will share anyways... basically he wondered if we could "eat our own dog 
> food" with respect to the REST API backing onto the new config 
> subsystem.  Wither a javascript or wicket application (ie separate 
> application) that communicates to the core geoserver module using the 
> REST API.
> 
> I personally hate the idea of writing our own javascript front end (sure 
> we could do it; but it would be a maintenance and testing hassle). I am 
> not too sure of the idea of making a Wicket application that fires 
> changes over to geoserver via the a REST api ... but it gives me an idea.
> 
> Could we use Andrea's spring remoting magic, publish the same config API 
> out via REST and via spring remoting (for a separate Wicket application?).
> 
> I am not sure if this idea holds any appeal. It may be a bad product 
> idea to introduce a REST API as a distinct layer; it would be way too 
> easy make new functionality quickly via REST and forget to keep the web 
> client up to date and in sync.
> 
> Jody
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
> Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
> Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
> http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
> _______________________________________________
> Geoserver-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Reply via email to