Integration of D5 about js16_projecte

[yashha]

So we make it too our task, before we loose more time.
I think it can be done in a day.

[jcebel]

Hey I will come back to this as soon as possible. I will have a discussion with the guys from D5 a 2 am.

[jcebel]

@yashha and I just discovered the main problem, that they have no server-side logic till now and the whole Project F runs on the Client machine, but in D5 is some functionality of automated analyses, which needs to be serverside.
We discovered the problems but still need to figure out how to handle them...

@yashha likes the idea most that A implements the functionality. But we both do agree, that it is a bad solution to change the whole structure of the project.

So we need to find a better solution. If someone has additional ideas please share them with us!
Project D5: @kajo404 @Logarythms @vanp33

Maybe @CavidSalahov has a suggestion as he will integrate Project D4?

PS: The automated function starts automatically, when the credentials for A-API access and Twitter-API are passed as configuration. see index.js line 8

[jsalahov]

I would go with @yashha's first suggestion. Why not initialize D5 in your server.js and set-up additional routes for it?

[jcebel]

@kajo404 had the same opinion. Sounds that doable to you guys?
@sacdallago any suggestions?

[yashha]

Yea sure, I think it will work.

[yashha]

I like the way the cavid wanna do this, can you also do it like this jonas or have you other things to do and we should implement it?
https://www.npmjs.com/package/gotsentimental

[jcebel]

you mean to set up the confiq manually or that there exists to entrypoints?
Ah got it :) We will work on it

[yashha]

I meant, that he has already done a node instance, which we just have to start. ;)
node app

[sacdallago]

Sorry guys, I was away for the day and am still traveling:

I get the problematic aspects, I was thinking you gouys (F) could couple a backend to your frontend, but setting up an API with just these dummy routes OS an acceptable solution.

[jcebel]

Ok I think I get it. And I will work on it. Tomorrow 12:00 is my personal deadline for this

[sacdallago]

Merci

[yashha]

Well we can couple it, everything is possible.
But thanks jonas ❤️

[jcebel]

As I can't reach @yashha at the moment (No problem a man needs its sleep ;-) ), I will leave my thoughts for open discussion: I had some talking with @CavidSalahov and we both do agree, that it is indeed conveniant for Project F, what Project D5 did, but they were going down this road very early in the project. But Project D5 did not. This is not a complaint, it's just the way it is at the moment. It would need time and effort to change the whole setup of the Project, which is needed at other places right now (Deadlines and stuff). I don't like the idea and the way how they need to change the architecture again.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I've seen Project F got a small backend/serverside application here?

So I would suggest we go down the route, which @CavidSalahov and @sacdallago suggested and Project F needs to do the frontend-backend-coupling-thing. (Hope this phrase is understandable?)

This is my opinion. Please respond to that if you feel unhappy about it or agree.