Hi wjm,
Could you summarize the solution for this issue?
Add some JIRA link for it, so other people can follow it up with these
information.
Willem Jiang
Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 11:45 PM wjm wjm <zzz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> Willem Jiang <willem.ji...@gmail.com> 于2018年9月15日周六 下午2:35写道：
>
> > +1.
> > We could let the user make their own choice by providing the detail
> > information about different protocol can do.
> >
> >
> > Willem Jiang
> >
> > Twitter: willemjiang
> > Weibo: 姜宁willem
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 2:22 PM bismy <bi...@qq.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Our goal is to design a transparent programming model for RPC, JAX-RS &
> > Spring MVC. Users do not need to know about which transport is used, and
> > can change it freely when deploying.
> > >
> > >
> > > However, with user requirements grows, we have already provided some
> > features can only be used for REST.
> > >
> > >
> > > My suggestion is we need to document explicitly the core programming
> > model that are supported by all transports, and list the specific features
> > for different transports.
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards your problems, I think we should following protobuffer
> > specifications, and not support this feature.
> > >
> > >
> > > If we can give some warning messages to users is preferred when they use
> > this feature in highway.
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------ 原始邮件 ------------------
> > > 发件人: "zzzwjm"<zzz...@gmail.com>;
> > > 发送时间: 2018年9月15日(星期六) 上午10:44
> > > 收件人: "dev"<dev@servicecomb.apache.org>;
> > >
> > > 主题: Re: [Discuss] new problem of protobuf
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > seems no way to resolve this
> > > maybe we can only log message that this schema not support highway and
> > > select rest transport automatically
> > >
> > > wjm wjm <zzz...@gmail.com> 于2018年9月15日周六 上午10:30写道：
> > >
> > > > problem is: protobuf not allow to define List<LIst>/ List<Map>
> > > >
> > > > wjm wjm <zzz...@gmail.com> 于2018年9月15日周六 上午10:27写道：
> > > >
> > > >> it's not protoStuff problem.
> > > >> protoStuff not suport serialize/deserialize without class
> > > >>
> > > >> Willem Jiang <willem.ji...@gmail.com> 于2018年9月15日周六 上午10:18写道：
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hi Jimin,
> > > >>> The best way is we send a PR for protoStuff to provide the solution
> > of
> > > >>> listList/listMap, but it may not meet the needs of our release
> > > >>> schedule.
> > > >>> I don't think maintain a fork version of protoStuff is good way to
> > go.
> > > >>> If we can wrap the protoStuff and extends it ourselves, it may meet
> > > >>> the needs of our release schedule.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Willem Jiang
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Twitter: willemjiang
> > > >>> Weibo: 姜宁willem
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 9:36 AM wjm wjm <zzz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > class Test {
> > > >>> > public List<List<String>> listList;
> > > >>> > public List<Map<String, String>> listMap;
> > > >>> > }
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > the field listList/listMap is invalid in protobuf.
> > > >>> > -----------
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > currently we process this by protoStuff runtimeSchema,
> > runtimeSchema
> > > >>> > generated from Test class, and runtimeSchema can support the
> > > >>> definition of
> > > >>> > listList/listMap(that's protoStuff rule, not protobuf rule)
> > > >>> > but because there are no classes in Edge service, currently we must
> > > >>> dynamic
> > > >>> > create new classes for protoStuff, that caused many problems.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > as we discussed before, we will not dynamic create new classes,
> > just
> > > >>> > serialize/deserialize by proto file, and proto file not support
> > > >>> > the definition of listList/listMap
> > > >>> > in this time, we must faced the compatible problem.
> > > >>> > what's the best of our choice......
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> >
