Closed SebastianSchildt closed 1 year ago
Should it support ws
(VISS) or is it OK to make the new feeder gRPC only?
Easy: It needs to support ws.
The rationale is, that we enable more of the ecosystem for databroker, but not regress on existing functionality. "new GRPC only" is only an option once either
So the idea of this whole API migration is to make the schism inside kuksa.val smaller not larger/more complicated for users.
If the easy way to achieve this, is still having "two modes" as with the current hack, that would be acceptable I think, if it not boils down to hiding two complete distinct feeders in one project....
Adding a potentially relevant comment from @erikbosch from https://github.com/eclipse/kuksa.val/pull/413
In dbc2val we have two DAPR-related configs. I can now understand the usecase for
VEHICLEDATABROKER_DAPR_APP_ID
, but I do not really see any reason forDAPR_GRPC_PORT
, you could as well use the standard config mechanisms for address and port, right?
Done in #33
Remove databroker specific code from dbc feeder, and integrate new kuksa-client python lib.
The resulting feeder shall work with databroker and kuksa.val server
When testing also take care of #28 #19 and #32