I'm posting my question because I haven't found clear answers to what I've read so far.
I have an application made up of a backend, a frontend (angular) and a mobile application.
Currently each project has its own versioning, is this a good practice or should we align all the technologies to one version?
We often find ourselves in the case where we make a feature that will impact the backend and mobile but not the frontend, in this case we do not increase the version number of the frontend (because no dev on this part). Version gaps appear, but the client has difficulty understanding this and often management insists that we also increase the frontend version so that all versions are aligned.
I think this is an aberration because for me versioning should reflect a technical reality and not be a reflection of what is best to present a new application delivery.
Related
I am looking for suggestion before I could plan / design an open source flutter package which enable developers to introduce distributed consensus to their application (basically a blockchain within mobile phones) along with their existing backend stack.
This package would work along with existing backend to generate identity, participate in validation of transaction, and store a copy of chain within their device. Later I am planning to use pluggable encryption based on developer’s need for enhanced security.
Keeping in mind of the best consensus as Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerant but PBFT/BFT has resource intensive PoW to do consensus which phones can't be, I am planning to implement PBFT based on technique explained in “Elastico” paper (review/summary is attached here [1]).
This is just an initial idea rolling in my mind for few hours now. I need to realise the feasibility this technique inside a mobile phone to form a network.
[1] https://muratbuffalo.blogspot.com/2018/03/paper-review-secure-sharding-protocol.html
Why do you want to build this
This package would help devs to integrate features of blockchain to their centralised app stack without rebuilding their backend. Talking about application part, consider situations which involve decision making and forming opinions, supply chain management, data provenance (integrating with IPFS)
Development of the plugin will take some real effort and time.
Not having done any serious feasibility study on the project but I believe this plugin will be useful for a longer run.
If there are some suggestions based on your experience in plugin development, pl share it here.
I'm learning about the REST architecture style, and there are some things I don't understand when it comes to developing a back-end api for clients.
I've read about various approaches to versioning an http api, which all make sense, but how do you indicate to a client, when he's using an outdated version of your api, that he needs to update his version? Is there a way to do this without physically contacting the client and telling him that he needs to update his version?
I was thinking there might be some way to require the client to indicate his current version and give an appropriate message if it's outdated. Is this standard or even feasible?
Typically, clients update under one of two circumstances. Either they want functionality that's available in a more recent version, or you're dropping support for a prior version.
If you're planning on dropping support for an API version, you should definitely be notifying any customers you can find proactively. If they rely on your API version, and it disappears with no warning, they're going to be former customers.
In the vast majority of cases, clients of your API will not be scanning network traffic looking for a header or other indicator that the API is changing. Asking them to do so is non-standard and almost certainly not feasible.
Also, dropping support for an API version is a major shift. It causes upheaval in all of your clients, forcing them to make a code change in their applications by a date of your choice. It's not something to be done lightly.
was wondering if anyone had a solution (hopefully simple) for how to change the repository that a SAPUI5 app pulls from.
i.e. when I'm accessing my app (might be hosted anywhere, but for argument's sake lets say on HCP in EU) and I'm in the EU, it makes sense to use the EU repository:
https://sapui5.hana.ondemand.com/resources/sap-ui-cachebuster/sap-ui-core.js
when in the US however, I'm going to get much better performance if I use the US repository:
https://sapui5.us1.hana.ondemand.com/resources/sap-ui-cachebuster/sap-ui-core.js
But short of having a US app and a EU app, how can I achieve this? I don't want to pop-up a request for the user to allow their browser to know where they are via using HTML Geo capabilities http://dev.w3.org/geo/api/spec-source.html and it seems most solutions to map IP addresses to location charge a fee (which I don't want to have to pay)
The standard way for this sort of thing on the web (afaik) would be just to use one address and have a CDN sort it out for you.
This doesn't seem to have happened for SAPUI5.
Anyone know why not? Or perhaps it has, and I just don't know about it, that would also be a very happily received answer.
Now, as of January 2015 there is such a CDN (with geo routing) implemented for OpenUI5 (or more specifically, for everything below the URL https://openui5.hana.ondemand.com).
It does not only serve the data from the closest SAP data center (Germany, USA, Australia), but uses the popular Akamai CDN technology on top, which provides thousands of servers around the world.
See http://openui5.tumblr.com/post/108835000027/openui5-in-your-neighborhood-a-true-cdn-has-gone for more details.
there is currently no such CDN with automatic routing to the closest server, sorry.
Reasons? Lack of time, money, demand...
There may be even free offerings for Open Source libs, but the total of UI5 is larger than your typical JS lib, so I'm not sure they would want it. And in older IE versions the cross-domain loading wasn't working anyway due to missing CORS support, hence a local deployment was preferred. And custom-tailored minimized runtimes for apps are the best for good performance, this is also not something a CDN can deliver. So currently there is no such thing even though it would be obviously good to have.
UI5 will load awesome fast if is part of a real app. Real app means a installable app from an App Store were the UI5 library is part of the app itself and not loaded from a server. That is the real destiny of UI5 and not putting it on a Gateway/Server (the Fiori Way, although there is the Fiori Client which tries to solve this).
I understand that SAP wants SAPUI5 on the backend because of integration in the SAP software lifecycle management. But it is bought with bad performance and caching issues. A very high price in my opinion! Luckily OpenUI5 is free to be part of real apps.
I'm developing an application that consists of a 'fat' javascript client backed by a JSON/REST server for data access. The data is stored in mongodb but the system should be flexible enough to switch to a relational backend if required.
I started out with pintura as the server side framework but recently ran into some problems (specifically with the perstore/filestore). I noticed that one problem has even been reported (including a fix) over a month ago, but there has been no reply to it and the issue is still present.
There seems to be relatively low activity in this project so I was wondering if many people are actually using it, and how stable the framework is.
Does anybody here have experience with this framework or know of an alternative framework that has similar capabilities?
I agree the project and the website/blog does not seem to be active, although the perstore repository does have recent activity. I'd contact the author there since your problem seems more related to that.
A search for REST on http://search.npmjs.org/ will show quite a few results, although I cannot recommend any from experience.
We are looking for a Asp.net CMS to integrate in our existing Enterprise-Webapplication. Some requirements:
Full integration in Visual Studio 2010 and our existing Application (so no Umbraco)
Common ASP.NET Web Forms Developing practices (Global.asax, Masterpages, User-/Custom-Controls)
Security (FormsAuthentication, custom Membership-/RoleProvider)
Very flexible and extendable (good API)
Lightweights CMS with good performance (thousands of simultaneous requests)
Easy content editing
At the moment we are looking at Sitefinity and N2CMS.
I really like the N2CMS approach (Integrate CMS engine in application) but is it mature enough for "real" usage scenarios? Is there another alternative to N2CMS?
Yes, N2 is mature. Company I work for is using it for more than three years now for various projects, and it is still our platform of choice. Best thing about it is that it is not CM System in a classic manner but rather CM Framework with several layers, meaning you have many things implemented, but they are not part of the core. As a result, you can change almost anything that is not usually changeable in other CMSes.
Also, whole architecture is organized in such a way that you can easily override almost any system behavior with your own implementation. Example? Imagine you reached 100s of news entries under News folder in site tree, and you decide to completely hide them from site tree, instead implementing plugin for manipulating them. Solution? Attribute-decorated class with 10 lines of code for hiding items in a tree based on your custom rule expressed in C# code.
I think N2 is pretty polished product and that you can go for it without too much worries.
We too are using N2. We've used it for a campaign site and now we are building our companies corporate website and the 20-or-so country specific subsidiary sites.
It is very fast to develop on (if you are a .net programmer it is a treat, an html-guy might find it difficult). Extremely flexible and extensible. And so far it seems to be very mature and stable. It has less features in terms of workflow-management than e.g. sitecore, but then again most customers put a lot of emphasis on those things, when they evaluate options, but end up not using them. So I don't think that is a problem.
The problem we are having is that it doesn't properly support preview, so website editors cannot preview their changes before publishing them. It is supposed to be done at some point, but there is no word on when.
Full disclosure, I work for Telerik and I'm the Sitefinity Evangelist.
Full integration in Visual Studio 2010 and our existing Application (so no Umbraco)
This is a difficult item to claim with a blanket statement.
I don't know much about your existing application. Our customers have accomplished a lot of Sitefinity integrations with various applications. This could be done through web services, custom controls or simply accounting for external URL's in Sitefinity's sitemap. Feel free to post to our Sitefinity forums for recommendations for your specific scenario.
Regarding Visual Studio integration, Sitefinity includes Telerik RadControls and OpenAccess ORM. We also try to align ourselves closely with traditional ASP.NET technologies.
Common ASP.NET Web Forms Developing practices
Sitefinity Templates = ASP.NET Master Pages
Editable CMS regions = ContentPlaceHolders
Sitefinity Widgets = ASP.NET Controls
Sitefinity Themes = ASP.NET Themes
We make the marketing claim "if you know ASP.NET, then you know Sitefinity". However, realistically all products comes with some learning curve. As much as possible we try to align ourselves with the experience ASP.NET developers already have.
Security (FormsAuthentication, custom Membership-/RoleProvider)
Sitefinity's authentication is based on traditional ASP.NET Membership & Role providers. We've included a couple (Sitefinity & Active Directory) but you can extend with your own.
Very flexible and extendable (good API)
Our API is LINQ enabled and we also have a Fluent API. We also have a full RESTful web service API.
Lightweight CMS with good performance (thousands of simultaneous requests)
Our own Telerik web sites run on Sitefinity, and many of our customers support web sites that handle a large volume of traffic.
However, I'm not sure what constitutes "lightweight". Many CMS's have little overhead, but also do very little. We've tried to deliver a lot of features and end-user friendliness with Sitefinity. This comes at the cost of some overhead.
Managing the balance between a CMS that "helps you" and "gets out of your way" is a constant challenge. The best I can promise is that we're aware of the challenge and we're doing our best to deliver effective results.
Easy content editing
Judge for yourself. Even better, download the product and let your content editors experiment. We welcome the comparison. Over & over again, this becomes our differentiator.
--
Hopefully this post doesn't sound like a lot of evangelist BS. I've tried to be accurate with my answers. Best of luck with your project.