Closed dajitui closed 1 year ago
@SofaService
mechanism depends on spring, but SOFA-RPC will not directly depend on spring. So, it is not suitable to add @SofaService
to SOFA-RPC.
Maybe we need a simpler SOFA-RPC starter only depends on Springboot.
as I thought
@SofaService
mechanism depends on spring, but SOFA-RPC will not directly depend on spring. So, it is not suitable to add@SofaService
to SOFA-RPC.Maybe we need a simpler SOFA-RPC starter only depends on Springboot.
yeah,as I thought
This is issue is discussed in https://github.com/sofastack/sofa-rpc/issues/1031, SOFA-RPC is a pure RPC framework,@SofaService only exist in sofa-boot(integrated with spring)
Great, it gave me an understanding of the previous design
However, there is still a problem inside. As an open source framework, it makes developers rely on Sofa-boot, which I think is unreasonable and the coupling is too heavy
As mentioned by OrezzerO above, a lightweight version of spring dependency is required
Great, it gave me an understanding of the previous design
However, there is still a problem inside. As an open source framework, it makes developers rely on Sofa-boot, which I think is unreasonable and the coupling is too heavy
As mentioned by OrezzerO above, a lightweight version of spring dependency is required
Now our community does not have enough resources to open a new repo to maintain a springboot version starter.
It is not difficult to write such a starter. Maybe you can write it and donate it to SOFAStack. @dajitui
OK, I see
Your question
@SofaService When I saw this annotation in Sofa-boot, I didn't think it was very reasonable
If I am a user, it is generally better to rely on fewer third-party packages. If I want to use Sofa-rpc now, I need to rely on Sofa-boot dependencies, which will be more important for the framework
Do you consider extracting these into the RPC module, while Sofa-boot only performs dependency and injection control? I think this framework design would be more reasonable