[
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.
