[jira] [Updated] (GOSSIP-78) Convert to multi-module maven project

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GOSSIP-78?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Edward Capriolo updated GOSSIP-78: -- Description: Without modifying any code, convert the project to a multi-module maven project

[jira] [Updated] (GOSSIP-79) create gossip-transport-udp module

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GOSSIP-79?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Edward Capriolo updated GOSSIP-79: -- Description: Create a transport module that houses the UDP transport. This will probably

[jira] [Updated] (GOSSIP-79) create gossip-transport-udp module

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GOSSIP-79?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Edward Capriolo updated GOSSIP-79: -- Description: Create a transport module that houses the UDP transport. This will probably

[jira] [Created] (GOSSIP-79) create gossip-transport-udp module

Gary Dusbabek created GOSSIP-79: --- Summary: create gossip-transport-udp module Key: GOSSIP-79 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GOSSIP-79 Project: Gossip Issue Type: Improvement

[jira] [Created] (GOSSIP-78) Convert to multi-module maven project

Gary Dusbabek created GOSSIP-78: --- Summary: Convert to multi-module maven project Key: GOSSIP-78 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GOSSIP-78 Project: Gossip Issue Type: Improvement

Re: service layers

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Gary Dusbabek wrote: > I am leery of using springboot as is. It brings a lot of transitive > dependencies. In fact, without looking I'm willing to bet its version of > Jackson and the one used by Gossip differ (happy to be wrong though). > >

Re: service layers

I am leery of using springboot as is. It brings a lot of transitive dependencies. In fact, without looking I'm willing to bet its version of Jackson and the one used by Gossip differ (happy to be wrong though). Here's why: Choosing a technology like springboot can function as a lock-in to

Re: service layers

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Gary Dusbabek wrote: > I have a few questions: > > 1. Interchangeable Transports: Is there support for adding transports > beyond UDP? I can see some utility for TCP-based transports. > > 2. Interchangeable Protocols: JSON is great for some

service layers

I have a few questions: 1. Interchangeable Transports: Is there support for adding transports beyond UDP? I can see some utility for TCP-based transports. 2. Interchangeable Protocols: JSON is great for some things, but IME nothing beats a good binary protocol. Also, would protocol versioning be