generator VS spec

AsyncAPI Generator

With the file created, we can now generate more friendly documentation. For this, we need to install generator or use it in its Docker version.

This can be improved and extended overtime, especially because of the way the generator is designed, enabling extensibility so we can have templates for many other languages that support more protocols, etc. For example, there is only a NATS generator for .NET Core... but perhaps in the future there could be more protocols supported for .NET Core and examples built for Azure 😃.

Continue improvements and add new features to core tools such as our spec parser/validator and code generator.

CloudEvents is trying to standardize on the messaging

https://cloudevents.io/

Hello guys, actually, vanus can directly deliver messages to OpenFaaS without this kind of connector. Because vanus can deliver messages that follow the CloudEvents standard, OpenFaaS can also receive such messages. More details https://docs.linkall.com/how-to/use-gcloud-functions

Lastly, workflow as a function flow in Automatiko is also based on Funqy, but this time it leverages Knative project to build function chaining based on events (Cloud Events). Knative is a kubernetes based platform to deploy and manage modern serverless workloads. In particular, Knative eventing comes with universal subscription, delivery and management of events that allows to build modern applications by attaching business logic on top of the data stream - the events.

One of the most exciting 2nd gen functionality is the ability to create functions of Cloud Events type. These are event functions that, instead of receiving an event in a proprietary Google Cloud format, will receive one in a standard format as described in the Cloud Events specification.

Curious why you decided to go for GraphQL instead of something like Cloud Events spec (https://cloudevents.io)

There is also https://cloudevents.io but I have never used it.

There are a few extensions worth mentioning, one of them is for distributed tracing. However, it seems there is some discussion around removing this extension from the spec (check this PR on GitHub). There are open issues on some SDKs to support it, and others have already made changes to remove it. The future isn't clear, but I'd argue it's interesting to follow this closely for any updates, since tracing events is very important in an event-driven architecture.

Note: We won't dig into partitioning problems in this article, nor will we use the partitioning extension of the Cloudevents specification. To continue the coding journey, you can refer to this implementation of a Kafka connect that publishes a "Cloudevent" into a topic.

Once again, it is the role of the “federated computational governance” to define the envelope format and standards. Cloudevents is one of those. It standardizes the exchange of messages between the cloud services.