Good day. AFAIK you prefer to do not force users to lean to one or another framework.
But practically it results in the fact that users have to know Netty to extend Gremlin Server which is heavier impact than asking users to check Guice workings. Also I have had impression that extention points in Gremlin Server are randomly placed and as result have quite steep learning curve. You practically need reverse engineer code to find them. Which: 1. Contradicting with target to enforce lightweight requirements on knowledge of Gremlin Server internals to extend it. 2. Usage of IoC will allow to provide systematic approach to extensions and makes it more effortless to extend it. On Wed, 19 Nov 2025, 16:52 Andrii Lomakin, <[email protected]> wrote: > Good day, > > Based on my experience, Gremlin Server is currently difficult to extend, > often requiring either branching off the code or injecting low-level code > directly into the Netty layer. > > However, Gremlin Server functions primarily as an Inversion of Control > (IoC) framework, similar in principle to Spring Boot. > > Given that a major redesign is already planned for the 4.0 version, what > are your thoughts on refactoring Gremlin Server to use Google Guice as the > main IoC driver? > > From my opinion it should noticeably simplify integration efforts for > vendors including main function such as management of graph instances. > > > Thanks, > Andrii Lomakin > YouTrackDB development lead > >
