[jira] Commented: (CONNECTORS-116) Possibly remove memex connector depending upon legal resolution
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-116?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12920542#action_12920542 ] Mark Miller commented on CONNECTORS-116: Indeed - my impression is that we are all happy to see this code be pulled if that's what the original contributors want (or what they are legally bound to want) - we just think that process should be public before the code is silently taken out back and shot ;) Possibly remove memex connector depending upon legal resolution --- Key: CONNECTORS-116 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-116 Project: ManifoldCF Issue Type: Task Components: Memex connector Reporter: Robert Muir Assignee: Robert Muir Apparently there is an IP problem with the memex connector code. Depending upon what apache legal says, we will take any action under this issue publicly. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Commented: (CONNECTORS-98) API should be pure RESTful with the API verb represented using the HTTP GET/PUT/POST/DELETE methods
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-98?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12908561#action_12908561
]
Mark Miller commented on CONNECTORS-98:
---
I agree - I think the best REST is sticking by most of the general practices as
you can / makes sense - but more importantly, just be consistent. While it can
be nice to stick to the http spec / REST gospel when you can, sometimes it just
makes sense to be a little different.
bq. (2) HTTP states that PUT should generate a 201 return when the resource is
being created.
Both PUT and POST can be used to create according to HTTP.
bq. (3) Use of plural/singular. I don't really care much. Pick something and
let me know and we'll stick with it.
I agree - it's only important to be consistant internally here - otherwise, who
cares.
API should be pure RESTful with the API verb represented using the HTTP
GET/PUT/POST/DELETE methods
-
Key: CONNECTORS-98
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-98
Project: Apache Connectors Framework
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: API
Affects Versions: LCF Release 0.5
Reporter: Jack Krupansky
Fix For: LCF Release 0.5
(This was originally a comment on CONNECTORS-56 dated 7/16/2010.)
It has come to my attention that the API would be more pure RESTful if the
API verb was represented using the HTTP GET/PUT/POST/DELETE methods and the
input argument identifier represented in the context path.
So, GET outputconnection/get \{connection_name:_connection_name_\} would
be GET outputconnections/connection_name
and GET outputconnection/delete \{connection_name:_connection_name_\}
would be DELETE outputconnections/connection_name
and GET outputconnection/list would be GET outputconnections
and PUT outputconnection/save
\{outputconnection:_output_connection_object_\} would be PUT
outputconnections/connection_name
\{outputconnection:_output_connection_object_\}
What we have today is certainly workable, but just not as pure as some
might desire. It would be better to take care of this before the initial
release so that we never have to answer the question of why it wasn't done as
a proper RESTful API.
BTW, I did check to verify that an HttpServlet running under Jetty can
process the DELETE and PUT methods (using the doDelete and doPut method
overrides.)
Also, POST should be usable as an alternative to PUT for API calls that have
large volumes of data.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Commented: (CONNECTORS-56) All features should be accessible through an API
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-56?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12902940#action_12902940 ] Mark Miller commented on CONNECTORS-56: --- bq. HTTP methods other than GET or PUT are in fact poorly supported in many HTTP clients, including Apache Commons HTTPClient. That's untrue. bq. I am also unsure of whether Jetty supports the DELETE method at the servlet level. Jetty has no issues with DELETE, POST, PUT, or GET. Nor does Tomcat or any other container I have seen. bq. I therefore think your suggestion would potentially cause a great deal of headache for no tangible benefit. Again, I don't agree - it would cause less headaches, as REST is somewhat of a standard rather than an ad hoc api. There are many advantages to having a consistent RESTful api. All features should be accessible through an API Key: CONNECTORS-56 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-56 Project: Apache Connectors Framework Issue Type: Sub-task Components: Framework core Reporter: Jack Krupansky Assignee: Karl Wright LCF consists of a full-featured crawling engine and a full-featured user interface to access the features of that engine, but some applications are better served with a full API that lets the application control the crawling engine, including creation and editing of connections and creation, editing, and control of jobs. Put simply, everything that a user can accomplish via the LCF UI should be doable through an LCF API. All LCF objects should be queryable through the API. A primary use case is Solr applications which currently use Aperture for crawling, but would prefer the full-featured capabilities of LCF as a crawling engine over Aperture. I do not wish to over-specify the API in this initial description, but I think the LCF API should probably be a traditional REST API., with some of the API elements specified via the context path, some parameters via URL query parameters, and complex, detailed structures as JSON (or similar.). The precise details of the API are beyond the scope of this initial description and will be added incrementally once the high-level approach to the API becomes reasonably settled. A job status and event reporting scheme is also needed in conjunction with the LCF API. That requirement has already been captured as CONNECTORS-41. The intention for the API is to create, edit, access, and control all of the objects managed by LCF. The main focus is on repositories, jobs, and status, and less about document-specific crawling information, but there may be some benefit to querying crawling status for individual documents as well. Nothing in this proposal should in any way limit or constrain the features that will be available in the LCF UI. The intent is that LCF should continue to have a full-featured UI, but in addition to a full-featured API. Note: This issue is part of Phase 2 of the CONNECTORS-50 umbrella issue. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Commented: (CONNECTORS-98) API should be pure RESTful with the API verb represented using the HTTP GET/PUT/POST/DELETE methods
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-98?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12902941#action_12902941
]
Mark Miller commented on CONNECTORS-98:
---
bq. Also, POST should be usable as an alternative to PUT for API calls that
have large volumes of data.
That shouldn't be necessary at all.
API should be pure RESTful with the API verb represented using the HTTP
GET/PUT/POST/DELETE methods
-
Key: CONNECTORS-98
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-98
Project: Apache Connectors Framework
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: API
Affects Versions: LCF Release 0.5
Reporter: Jack Krupansky
Fix For: LCF Release 0.5
(This was originally a comment on CONNECTORS-56 dated 7/16/2010.)
It has come to my attention that the API would be more pure RESTful if the
API verb was represented using the HTTP GET/PUT/POST/DELETE methods and the
input argument identifier represented in the context path.
So, GET outputconnection/get \{connection_name:_connection_name_\} would
be GET outputconnections/connection_name
and GET outputconnection/delete \{connection_name:_connection_name_\}
would be DELETE outputconnections/connection_name
and GET outputconnection/list would be GET outputconnections
and PUT outputconnection/save
\{outputconnection:_output_connection_object_\} would be PUT
outputconnections/connection_name
\{outputconnection:_output_connection_object_\}
What we have today is certainly workable, but just not as pure as some
might desire. It would be better to take care of this before the initial
release so that we never have to answer the question of why it wasn't done as
a proper RESTful API.
BTW, I did check to verify that an HttpServlet running under Jetty can
process the DELETE and PUT methods (using the doDelete and doPut method
overrides.)
Also, POST should be usable as an alternative to PUT for API calls that have
large volumes of data.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Commented: (CONNECTORS-40) Classloader-based plug-in architecture would permit LCF to be prebuilt
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-40?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12879178#action_12879178 ] Mark Miller commented on CONNECTORS-40: --- From http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/760aeaa785116e3b/beginning_of_connectors_40_work : Hi all (and especially Eric), I began work on CONNECTORS-40 in the agreed-upon branch. So far, I've checked in the modifications needed to pull output connector UI out of JSP, and also did the conversion of the gts output connector from JSP. This looks reasonably good to me, other than the somewhat-more-obtuse syntax required to represent HTML from within the java connector classes. But it would be good to hear any comments before I go further in the conversion process. Thanks, Karl Mark: you can find a link to the diffs ref'd here: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-connectors-commits/201006.mbox/%3c20100615191345.6a2072388...@eris.apache.org%3e Classloader-based plug-in architecture would permit LCF to be prebuilt -- Key: CONNECTORS-40 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-40 Project: Lucene Connector Framework Issue Type: Improvement Components: Framework core Reporter: Karl Wright The LCF architecture at this point requires interaction with the build script in order to add connectors. This is because the connector JSPs and jars need to be added to the appropriate war files. However, there is another architectural option that would eliminate this need, which is to use a custom classloader to pull components from jars that are placed in a specific directory or directories. In order for this to work, however, the UI components of every connector must become part of a jar. That implies that they will need to cease being JSPs, and become instead methods of each connector class. (There is no proscription against using something like Velocity for assembling the necessary output for a connector, however.) Limiting the backwards-compatibility impact of this change will be difficult, especially after a first release is made, so it seems clear that any change along these lines should be attempted before version 1.0 is released. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Created: (CONNECTORS-43) Useless call to String.trim() in org.apache.lcf.ui.util.MultilineParser
Useless call to String.trim() in org.apache.lcf.ui.util.MultilineParser
---
Key: CONNECTORS-43
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-43
Project: Lucene Connector Framework
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Mark Miller
Priority: Trivial
{code}
nextString.trim();
{code}
should likely be:
{code}
nextString = nextString.trim();
{code}
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
