与直接使用包装的 Twitter 等库相比，SpringSocial 为我带来了哪些额外好处
快速浏览一下 SpringSocial，就会发现每个社交网络都有自己不同的独特之处。没有
- 向网络
- sendMessage
公开通用身份验证的接口上面列出的“向网络进行身份验证”的原因是我希望包括应用程序本身发布消息的工具，而不仅仅是单个用户。
至少 Jtwitter 公开了一个简单的 API 来进行身份验证，然后发送推文。与相对简单的 Jtwitter 相比，要使用 SS 实现相同的复杂性是压倒性的。 SS 需要 Spring，commons http 客户端，这显然比 jtwitter 多得多。如果 SS 有一个通用的机制来连接然后发送而不是为每个机制发送自定义代码，那么它可能是值得的，但最终它不会......
我对 SS 的假设或看法是错误的吗？
Taking a quick look at SpringSocial it would appear that each social network has its own different unique. There is no interface exposing a universal
- authenticate to network
- sendMessage
The reason for the "authenticate to network" listed above is i would like to include the facility for the application itself to publish messages rather than just individual users.
At least Jtwitter exposes a simple api to authenticate and then send a tweet. To achieve the same w/ SS the amount of complexity is overwhelming compared to the relative simplicity of Jtwitter. SS requires Spring, commons http client which obviously is a lot more than jtwitter. If SS had a universal mechanism to connect and then send rather than custom code for each then it would be probably worthwhile, but in the end it doesnt...
Are my assumptions or perceptions about SS wrong ?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（2）
Spring Social 在幕后由四个部分组成：
只有最后一部分可以与包装库（例如 JTwitter）进行比较。
如果您不需要建立 OAuth 连接，请不要使用 Spring Social。
我的 2 美分想到了 SS：
乍一看，我有点失望。
Spring Social 被描述为 Spring 框架的扩展，它允许您将应用程序与 Facebook 和 Twitter 等软件即服务 (SaaS) 提供商连接起来。
不幸的是，v1.0 中的这个框架无法轻松扩展以支持没有 OAuth 的连接。
如果SS被分成3部分应该会更好，例如：
Spring Social is composed behind the scene in four parts :
Only the last part can be compared to wrapper libs (eg. JTwitter).
If you don't need to establish OAuth connections, don't use Spring Social.
My 2 cents thought about SS :
I was a bit disappointed, at first glance.
Spring Social is described as an extension of the Spring Framework that allows you to connect your applications with Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) providers such as Facebook and Twitter.
Unfortunately this framework in v1.0 cannot be easily extended to support connections without OAuth.
It should be better if SS have been split in 3 parts, for example :
Spring Social 主要关注在使用这些社交 API 时简化 OAuth 相关问题。
它的目标不是为不同社交网站上的类似功能提供统一的 API - 因此，它为每个网站都有一个专门的 API。
这并不意味着您不能在 Spring Social 之上构建一个额外的 API 层来统一 API 的某些（对您来说很重要）方面。
您抱怨 Spring Social API 的复杂性 - 我不明白，您能确切地说出使用 Spring Social 发布推文有什么复杂之处吗：（
这来自 SpringSource 博客文章)
还有，关于依赖项 ：大多数使用 Spring Social 的应用程序很可能已经将 Spring 和 HttpClient 作为依赖项，因此对于典型的 Spring Social 开发人员来说，这些并不是什么额外的东西。
最后，如果 jTwitter 满足您的需求，那么它似乎是最适合您的。对于每个人来说，他们自己的。 ;-)
另请参阅：
Spring Social mainly focuses on simplifying the OAuth-related issues, when using those social APIs.
It's aim is NOT to provide a unified API to similar functions across different social networking sites - as such, it has a specialized API for each site.
Which does not mean that you could not build an additional API layer on top of Spring Social that would unify some (important for you) aspect of the API.
You complained about the complexity of the Spring Social API - I don't get it, could you tell exactly, what is complicated about posting a tweet with Spring Social:
(this is from the SpringSource blog post)
And, about the dependencies: most of the applications that would use Spring Social most probably already have Spring and HttpClient as dependencies, so these are not anything extra for the typical Spring Social developer.
Finally, if jTwitter satisfies your needs then that seems to be the best fit for you. To each, their own. ;-)
See also: