Thanks, Julian! I meant to make one, just hadn't gotten around to it.
Julian Hyde wrote:
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
