[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1552?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16034520#comment-16034520
]
Jorge Bay edited comment on TINKERPOP-1552 at 6/2/17 11:34 AM:
---------------------------------------------------------------
bq. I'm personally in favor of Gremlin.Net instead of Gremlin.DotNet because it
looks nicer in my opinion and because it would allow us to reuse the existing
Gremlin.Net NuGet package easily. Otherwise we would end up with two packages
on nuget.org: Gremlin.Net and Gremlin.DotNet which would only confuse users.
Gremlin.Net sounds better to me too and reusing the existing Nuget package is a
big plus.
About whether to include the driver in the package, I think it was discussed
back in TINKERPOP-1489 that a GLV should include a {{RemoteConnection}}
implementation. I'm not personally interested in the {{RemoteConnection}}
implementation but having one seems to be in the best interest of the TinkerPop
community, regardless of our employers.
was (Author: jorgebg):
bq. I'm personally in favor of Gremlin.Net instead of Gremlin.DotNet because it
looks nicer in my opinion and because it would allow us to reuse the existing
Gremlin.Net NuGet package easily. Otherwise we would end up with two packages
on nuget.org: Gremlin.Net and Gremlin.DotNet which would only confuse users.
Gremlin.Net sounds better to me too and reusing the existing Nuget package is a
big plus.
About wether to include the driver in the package, I think it was discussed
back in TINKERPOP-1489 that a GLV should include a {{RemoteConnection}}
implementation. I'm not personally interested in the {{RemoteConnection}}
implementation but having one seems to be in the best interest of the TinkerPop
community, regardless of our employers.
> C# Gremlin Language Variant
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP-1552
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1552
> Project: TinkerPop
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: language-variant
> Affects Versions: 3.2.3
> Reporter: Jorge Bay
> Assignee: stephen mallette
>
> It would be nice to have a C# GLV that runs under .NET Framework 4.5+ and
> .NET Core.
> The maven build could use the Exec Maven Plugin to exec .NET Core's [dotnet
> test|https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#macos] command.
> Some requirements, from the mailing list (edited):
> {quote}
> 1. The GLV should keep in line with class/method names of the java API
> where possible to ensure consistency of feel across languages.
> 2. There needs to be adequate tests (we're still discussing the approach to
> testing GLVs and i think that needs to be tackled sooner than later as more
> GLVs start to come in). Those tests should produce xunit style output
> unless there is some good reason not to.
> 3. There needs to be adequate documentation (e.g. Reference docs)
> 4. The build/deploy process needs to be bound to maven which might be one of
> the trickier bits to deal with.
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
