New Service Framework Chapter?

[pchainho]

There is already a mention at 1.1:

In addition, during the implementation phase, an Hyperty Framework to be used by Hyperty Developers will be developed and reported in D3.2.

should we add something more?

[sbecot]

Well, is it obvious for an external reviewer? This document is documenting the runtime and the server. We have promised a developer friendly framework, and at this time we have a direct view on the internal engine. The term "Hyperty Framework" could be understood as the set of "Runtime" "Node", etc..., but it is not, it is a dedicated set of tool for the developer (as I understand). A short view of what will be provided for, and expected from the developer to code and deploy a service (the external interface at a glance) could help? The minimum would be to add a clear definition (maybe at the beginning of the Requirement chapter) of the 4 elements mentioned.

[acheambe]

I also think it will make sense to have a chapter for the Service/Hyperty Framework to clarify to the reader what it is and what it will provide. It is mentioned in SoTA and Requirements sections. The Runtime APIs can be mistaken for the Hyperty framework.

[pchainho]

Agreed to have a new dedicated chapter 6 "Hyperty Framework Specification"

Provide contribution: https://github.com/reTHINK-project/core-framework/tree/master/docs/specs/service-framework

[pchainho]

Some thoughts:

• identify runtime APIs to be consumed by Hyperties namely:
  • MsgBUS.postMessage()
  • Syncher API
• identify runtime APIs to be implemented by Hyperties: Hyperty API
• Dependencies on standard Data Models:
  • Message Model
  • Data Objects Schemas depending on Hyperty Type. eg for communication it would use Connection (+Communication) Data Object schema.
• Templates a la angular (eg HTML tag) that would auto generate the source code for an hyperty dealing with a specific data object schema
• modules for popular frameworks like Angular
• plugins / packages for popular IDEs like Atom.io

[acheambe]

Thanks for input: These are unclear to me:

"modules for popular frameworks like Angular". As i understand the developers will be free to choose what other frameworks they might like to choose. The service/Hyperty framework will not have to provide modules for that.

"plugins/packages for popular IDEs"?. The framework would be a library from which developers can use APIs related to reTHINK related use cases. I do not understand this connection to to IDEs.

[pchainho]

"modules for popular frameworks like Angular". As i understand the developers will be free to choose what other frameworks they might like to choose. The service/Hyperty framework will not have to provide modules for that.

Yes, but we could consider the possibility to have some "special" addons for Angular fans without imposing the usage of Angular to all developers, or do you think this is not possible? Possible sure, but out of scope i think. Angular fans still have the possibility of using Angular for their applications, irrespective of the Hyperty Framework.

"plugins/packages for popular IDEs"?. The framework would be a library from which developers can use APIs related to reTHINK related use cases. I do not understand this connection to to IDEs.

One example / idea would be to support code generation from plantuml class diagrams or just snippets in atom.io with a reTHINK package that could be bind to standard reTHINK datamodels / apis from the github repo

Sounds good. I am not familiar with atom.io. My fear here is the scope definition. Automating code generation from diagrams to snippets in atom.io sounds to me like the discussions we had with Typescript isn't it. Not sure.

[acheambe]

Done