[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-2473?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17239659#comment-17239659
]
Stephen Mallette commented on TINKERPOP-2473:
---------------------------------------------
There was once a notion of "required" strategies on TINKERPOP-669 - perhaps
that idea could be revived. I think it was meant more to ensure that system
strategies (ones that need to be present for proper Gremlin execution) could
not be removed but I imagine it could be resurrected with that idea in mind
plus this new issue you bring up.
With TINKERPOP-2389 the workaround to this issue would be to have an
`Authorizer` that examines incoming requests and rejects calls to
`withoutStrategies()`?
> Allow TraversalStrategy instances to be merged
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP-2473
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-2473
> Project: TinkerPop
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: process
> Affects Versions: 3.4.8
> Reporter: Stephen Mallette
> Priority: Major
>
> Not sure if this is a great idea but it came up as part of TINKERPOP-2389
> where there might be a need to assign both a client-side and server-side
> {{SubgraphStrategy}}. Currently, while not explicit, you can't assign more
> than one strategy of a particular type using {{withStrategies()}}. This task
> would make that explicit and provide a direct way for mergeable strategies to
> be pushed together into one. If we did that it would also simplify
> {{OptionsStrategy}} usage in {{with()}} step which currently finds an
> existing one first if present and then adds to it (otherwise creates it new).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
