Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Upgrade Project Structure for Quarkus JNoSQL #87

Open
otaviojava opened this issue Feb 18, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

Upgrade Project Structure for Quarkus JNoSQL #87

otaviojava opened this issue Feb 18, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@otaviojava
Copy link
Contributor

This issue addresses the planned upgrade of the project structure for the Quarkus JNoSQL integration. The goal is to enhance organization and consistency within the project, simplifying management and improving developer experience.

Key Changes:

  • New Project Structure: Transition from the current categorization based on database types to a two-category structure:

    • jnosql-parent: This directory will contain all JNoSQL API-related modules.
    • databases: Modules specific to individual databases will be grouped here, promoting consistency.
  • Artifact ID Update: Update artifact IDs to remove the type from names, ensuring naming consistency across modules. For example, quarkus-jnosql-document-arangodb will be renamed to quarkus-jnosql-arangodb.

@otaviojava otaviojava added bug Something isn't working and removed bug Something isn't working labels Feb 18, 2024
@dearrudam
Copy link
Contributor

@otaviojava that's a great idea! I think that's a reasonable change once there are database providers that offer multiple database nosql type support. eg: Couchbase, DynamoDB, among other.

@amoscatelli
Copy link
Contributor

That's fine by me.
Having different parents (quarkus-jnosql-keyvalue, quarkus-jnosql-document, quarkus-jnosql-column) could allow, tomorrow, to specify dependencies and plugins for the specific context only.

I do agree today this is not required nor utilized.

But if you think this is relevant, again, that's fine by me.

Thank you.

@dearrudam
Copy link
Contributor

dearrudam commented Feb 24, 2024

Well... IHMO, having different parents, as you're saying @amoscatelli, is interesting if someone intends to provide database support implementations outside of the official JNoSQL implementations, and I think that's not the intention of this extension.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants