I published an initial post on staging: http://staging.in.relation.to/2016/08/26/should-we-drop-rest-for-neo4j/
I'm not sure how should I ask the user about it, let me know what you think. Also, is there a way we prefer to generate poll for the website or I can just rely on the comment? This one looks nice: http://www.poll-maker.com/ On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Sanne Grinovero <sa...@hibernate.org> wrote: > On 26 August 2016 at 12:35, Emmanuel Bernard <emman...@hibernate.org> wrote: >> On Fri 2016-08-26 11:32, Gunnar Morling wrote: >>> > How much additional work would it be to keep the "old" rest in a legacy >>> module separated from the pure one? >>> > Does it even make sense? >>> >>> As a user, when would I prefer which one over the other? If Bolt is the >>> general recommendation, I'd limit efforts on this one. It seems to be one >>> of those knobs I'd prevent the user from having to set if possible. >> >> The one I can think of is not being able to open custom ports > > In similar situations, I sometimes exposed other services over port 80 .. > /me ducks and runs.. > >> >>> >>> > Can you write a blog post with a small poll to know if anyone complains >>> > about dropping REST >>> >>> +1. Would be nice to get some feedback. >>> >>> >>> >>> 2016-08-26 10:10 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Bernard <emman...@hibernate.org>: >>> >>> > Can you write a blog post with a small poll to know if anyone complains >>> > about dropping REST. Let's have it on for a week and make a decision. If >>> > nothing conclusive comes out, let's drop it. >>> > >>> > On Fri 2016-08-26 8:27, Davide D'Alto wrote: >>> > > > Thinking out loud. How much additional work would it be to keep the >>> > "old" rest in a legacy module >>> > > >>> > > It would still require to be maintained, I would prefer not to have it >>> > > unless there is a specific use case for it >>> > > >>> > > >. Does Bolt run atop HTTP as I remember it >>> > > >>> > > I don't think so, it's a binary protocol that connects to a port using >>> > sockets. >>> > > >>> > > > PS: it's a bit sad that we implement something (rest remote) and it's >>> > ready and by lack of release it is replaced and remove it without seeing >>> > the light of day. Release often. >>> > > >>> > > That's actually a bad call from my side, I wanted to release with the >>> > > new ORM and it took longer than expected to merge the PR. >>> > > >>> > > Davide >>> > > >>> > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 7:53 AM, Emmanuel Bernard >>> > > <emman...@hibernate.org> wrote: >>> > > > Thinking out loud. How much additional work would it be to keep the >>> > "old" rest in a legacy module separated from the pure one? >>> > > > Does it even make sense? >>> > > > >>> > > > I'm fine with the removal and focus on bolt on a general basis. Does >>> > Bolt run atop HTTP as I remember it ? Or is that specific ? If the later >>> > some might want to keep using rest. >>> > > > >>> > > > Emmanuel >>> > > > >>> > > > PS: it's a bit sad that we implement something (rest remote) and it's >>> > ready and by lack of release it is replaced and remove it without seeing >>> > the light of day. Release often. >>> > > > >>> > > >> On 22 août 2016, at 22:25, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.s...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > > >> >>> > > >> Hi Davide, >>> > > >> >>> > > >> I wanted to add 2 things: >>> > > >> - Neo4j remote with Rest has not been released yet; >>> > > >> - if we remove the Rest protocol, remote Neo4j will only be supported >>> > with >>> > > >> Neo4j >= 3 >>> > > >> >>> > > >> Personally I'm +1 to only support remote Neo4j with Bolt. Maintaining >>> > one >>> > > >> more dialect/protocol just to provide remote for Neo4j < 3 does not >>> > sound >>> > > >> like a good tradeoff to me. >>> > > >> >>> > > >> -- >>> > > >> Guillaume >>> > > >> >>> > > >>> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 8:11 PM, Davide D'Alto >>> > > >>> <dav...@hibernate.org> >>> > wrote: >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> Hello, >>> > > >>> at the moment in OGM we connect remotely using the Rest API. >>> > > >>> The reason is that when I created the dialect the new Bolt[1] >>> > protocol >>> > > >>> wasn't available. >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> I've now finished implementing the dialect so that it uses the Bolt >>> > > >>> protocol, there is a lot of duplication since it is very similar to >>> > > >>> the approach I used for Rest. >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> I worked for a while trying to improve the code but I started to >>> > > >>> wonder if it might be really helpful to provide two ways to connect >>> > > >>> remotely with an increase in complexity of the code (more interfaces >>> > > >>> mainly with some additional classes). >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> I'm now of the idea that we could remove the dialect thata uses Rest >>> > > >>> and only keep the one that uses Bolt (as suggested by Giulliame in >>> > > >>> an >>> > > >>> old chat on hipchat). >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> This will simplify the code and we can always add it back if the >>> > > >>> need >>> > > >>> arise or somebody asks. >>> > > >>> Note that the Bolt protocol is the suggested one to use for Neo4j >>> > > >>> since it promises better performance. >>> > > >>> It will also allow us to remove some dependencies required for the >>> > rest >>> > > >>> client. >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> Please, let me know if you think there is value in keeping both >>> > > >>> approaches, otherwise I'm going to send a PR that removes the remote >>> > > >>> one. >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> Thanks, >>> > > >>> Davide >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> [1] https://dzone.com/articles/introducing-bolt-neo4js- >>> > > >>> upcoming-binary-protocol-p >>> > > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> > > >>> hibernate-dev mailing list >>> > > >>> hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >>> > > >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >>> > > >> _______________________________________________ >>> > > >> hibernate-dev mailing list >>> > > >> hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >>> > > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > _______________________________________________ >>> > > > hibernate-dev mailing list >>> > > > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >>> > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > hibernate-dev mailing list >>> > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >>> > >> _______________________________________________ >> hibernate-dev mailing list >> hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
