You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I'm also very doubtful it was a good decision to entirely rely on Spring HATEOAS for the backing model which is then mapped to Hydra in a hardcoded way. For Links that mapping is done in a seemingly never ending if-else chain in LinkListSerializer. This class alone I consider highly problematic with regards to judging the readiness of this framework to support the adoption of Hydra in the Java ecosystem. Unfortunately hydra-java is the only listed Java implementation on hydra-cg.com, making it look a bit like THE Hydra reference implementation, which it clearly isn't. At least not as long as the actual Hydra model lives in a bunch of highly nested if/else branches with TODOs galore on them. Yes I understand it's all in testing but that's still no excuse to leave it like this.
That's all well and good if hydra-java is just some random Hydra implementation on GitHub serving mostly the creators own needs.
At the same time I'm not sure how many visitors looking for a Java Hydra backend implementation came here, noticed that...
The Hydra vocabulary is not actually modelled, let alone properly exposed.
The project has multiple hard dependencies to Spring. Where I work Spring in general is considered enterprise legacy cruft.
Is seems conceptually opaque and written in a less than expressive code style in its most vital parts.
... and then left immediately.
With that in mind and the observation this project smells all but dead - this seems like a wasted opportunity. I cannot even fork this because it would basically be an 80% rewrite.
Also, what have Siren and Uber to do in a project named hydra-java?
Yes, this is a rant! If you create something, leave it in a prominent place, making it look like a solution to a problem and then just never come back - it will cost other peoples time.
Paxbit
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi dschulten,
I'm relating to #18 .
I'm also very doubtful it was a good decision to entirely rely on Spring HATEOAS for the backing model which is then mapped to Hydra in a hardcoded way. For Links that mapping is done in a seemingly never ending if-else chain in LinkListSerializer. This class alone I consider highly problematic with regards to judging the readiness of this framework to support the adoption of Hydra in the Java ecosystem. Unfortunately hydra-java is the only listed Java implementation on hydra-cg.com, making it look a bit like THE Hydra reference implementation, which it clearly isn't. At least not as long as the actual Hydra model lives in a bunch of highly nested if/else branches with TODOs galore on them. Yes I understand it's all in testing but that's still no excuse to leave it like this.
That's all well and good if hydra-java is just some random Hydra implementation on GitHub serving mostly the creators own needs.
At the same time I'm not sure how many visitors looking for a Java Hydra backend implementation came here, noticed that...
... and then left immediately.
With that in mind and the observation this project smells all but dead - this seems like a wasted opportunity. I cannot even fork this because it would basically be an 80% rewrite.
Also, what have Siren and Uber to do in a project named hydra-java?
Yes, this is a rant! If you create something, leave it in a prominent place, making it look like a solution to a problem and then just never come back - it will cost other peoples time.
Paxbit
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: