I have logged https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-839 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-839> for this task.
> On Aug 10, 2015, at 8:27 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: > > Julian Hyde wrote: >> If my understand is correct, this decision is an easy one to make, because >> whatever we choose, we still comply with the specification. >> >> Avatica specifies its API at two levels: (1) the Java API (Meta), (2) the >> JSON requests/responses going over the wire. >> >> I would accept any transport that complies with both of those levels. In >> principle we could write a JSON-over-HTTP-marshalled-via-Jackson transport, >> specifying the mappings elsewhere than in the Meta classes, and someone else >> could use another transport. > > Assuming by "specifying the mappings elsewhere" you mean "by a means other > than POJOs", yes, I'd agree. I feel like the POJOs are bound to eventually > cause troubles across versions (as it's very easy to accidentally make some > change that breaks something you forgot you did before). > > Any serialization library isn't foolproof obviously, but they are certainly > much easier to work around than doing it all by hand. > >> Is it feasible to achieve this? >> >> Julian >>
