[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-203?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ian Boston updated SHINDIG-203:
-------------------------------
Attachment: SHINDIG-203-non-functioning.patch.gz
Patch updated to SVN r666336
However,
The JSON serialization binds direct to the concrete classes which a) need to be
bound to in the social-api impl, and b) need to be mentioned in parameterised
constructors to ensure that the serializer is given the correct construction
information.
So,
An API on the services with no concrete classes will not work at the moment.
The mechanism of creating classes on json-bean needs to bind to factories on
non-impl specific classes. Since this area is currently under review, this
patch does not work, and is only a snapshot. (there are also some fornatting
errors)
> Extract Interfaces from the Social Model to make it easier to Implements
> Social Containers
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SHINDIG-203
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-203
> Project: Shindig
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: RESTful API (Java)
> Reporter: Ian Boston
> Attachments: SHINDIG-203-3.patch, SHINDIG-203-4.patch,
> SHINDIG-203-non-functioning.patch.gz
>
>
> Currently the PersonService and other API's in the org.apache.shindig.social
> package contain concrete classes in the form of Pojos to represent the model.
> Although this is fine, it does limit the implementation strategy to those
> methods that can operate on PoJos by reflection and building the pojos. For
> some this is Ok, where there use GCLib or ApsectJ to enhance the Pojos so
> avoiding excessive Object GC activity, but for those more direct ORM
> implementations, that already use class extension and a method to make the
> persistence simpler, concrete classes in the model make it impossible to
> implement the social model storage.
> The alternative is to copy the object from the storage into the model, and
> or add caching outside the storage space. This is quite a lot of code to do
> property, will replicate a significant amount of ORM functionality and will
> have an impact on the GC as more objects will be created and destroyed during
> each request cycle.
> Converting the API to interfaces (containing the necessary Enums) will enable
> any implementation strategy to work (including things like javax.jcr.Node )
> and is minimal impact on those that want a Pojo, since they can very quickly
> implement their own Pojos. It will also prevent the consumer of the API
> creating object instances and assuming that they will be saved.
> I will attach a patch in a moment, and add a related implementation of the
> Storage layer that uses interfaces.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
