yudao-cloud

Pros of spring-cloud-alibaba

• More comprehensive and mature ecosystem for building distributed systems
• Stronger community support and regular updates
• Better integration with Alibaba Cloud services

Cons of spring-cloud-alibaba

• Steeper learning curve due to its extensive feature set
• May be overkill for smaller projects or simpler microservices architectures
• Potential vendor lock-in with Alibaba Cloud services

Code Comparison

spring-cloud-alibaba:

@SpringBootApplication
@EnableDiscoveryClient
public class ProviderApplication {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        SpringApplication.run(ProviderApplication.class, args);
    }
}

yudao-cloud:

@SpringBootApplication
@EnableRyuuDiscoveryClient
public class SystemServerApplication {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        SpringApplication.run(SystemServerApplication.class, args);
    }
}

The code snippets show similar application bootstrapping, but spring-cloud-alibaba uses the standard @EnableDiscoveryClient annotation, while yudao-cloud uses a custom @EnableRyuuDiscoveryClient annotation.

spring-cloud-alibaba offers a more comprehensive solution for building cloud-native applications, with better integration for Alibaba Cloud services. However, it may be more complex and potentially lead to vendor lock-in. yudao-cloud, on the other hand, appears to be a more lightweight and customized solution, which might be easier to adopt for smaller projects but may lack some advanced features and community support compared to spring-cloud-alibaba.

Pros of mall

• More comprehensive e-commerce features, including order management and payment integration
• Extensive documentation and tutorials for easier onboarding
• Larger community and more frequent updates

Cons of mall

• Higher complexity due to its extensive feature set
• Steeper learning curve for developers new to e-commerce systems
• Less focus on microservices architecture compared to yudao-cloud

Code Comparison

mall (Product Service):

@Service
public class PmsProductServiceImpl implements PmsProductService {
    @Autowired
    private PmsProductMapper productMapper;
    
    @Override
    public List<PmsProduct> list(PmsProductQueryParam productQueryParam,
                                 Integer pageSize, Integer pageNum) {
        PageHelper.startPage(pageNum, pageSize);
        return productMapper.selectList(productQueryParam);
    }
}

yudao-cloud (Product Service):

@Service
public class ProductServiceImpl implements ProductService {
    @Resource
    private ProductMapper productMapper;

    @Override
    public PageResult<ProductDO> getProductPage(ProductPageReqVO pageReqVO) {
        return productMapper.selectPage(pageReqVO);
    }
}

Both projects implement product-related services, but mall's implementation appears more detailed with specific query parameters, while yudao-cloud uses a more generic approach with a PageResult object.

Pros of microservices-platform

• More comprehensive documentation and guides for setup and usage
• Includes a built-in API gateway for better service management
• Offers a wider range of pre-built microservices components

Cons of microservices-platform

• Less frequent updates and maintenance compared to yudao-cloud
• Slightly more complex architecture, potentially steeper learning curve
• Fewer integrations with modern cloud-native technologies

Code Comparison

microservices-platform:

@EnableFeignClients
@EnableDiscoveryClient
@SpringBootApplication
public class UserCenterApp {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        SpringApplication.run(UserCenterApp.class, args);
    }
}

yudao-cloud:

@SpringBootApplication
@EnableDiscoveryClient
@EnableFeignClients(basePackages = "cn.iocoder.yudao.module.system.api")
public class SystemServerApplication {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        SpringApplication.run(SystemServerApplication.class, args);
    }
}

Both projects use similar Spring Boot annotations for microservices setup, but yudao-cloud specifies a base package for Feign clients, potentially offering more granular control over service discovery.

Pros of SpringCloud

• More focused on microservices architecture and cloud-native development
• Provides a comprehensive set of tools for service discovery, configuration management, and distributed tracing
• Offers a simpler and more straightforward project structure

Cons of SpringCloud

• Less actively maintained, with fewer recent updates compared to yudao-cloud
• Limited documentation and examples, which may make it challenging for newcomers
• Fewer integrated modules and features compared to yudao-cloud's extensive ecosystem

Code Comparison

SpringCloud:

@EnableDiscoveryClient
@SpringBootApplication
public class AuthApplication {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        SpringApplication.run(AuthApplication.class, args);
    }
}

yudao-cloud:

@SpringBootApplication
@EnableRyuuDiscoveryClient
@EnableRyuuFeignClients
public class YudaoSystemServerApplication {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        SpringApplication.run(YudaoSystemServerApplication.class, args);
    }
}

Both projects use Spring Boot and enable service discovery, but yudao-cloud includes additional custom annotations for enhanced functionality.

Pros of paascloud-master

• More comprehensive documentation and user guides
• Broader scope with additional features like message queuing and distributed transactions
• Larger community and more active development

Cons of paascloud-master

• Higher complexity and steeper learning curve
• Less frequent updates and potentially outdated dependencies
• More resource-intensive due to its extensive feature set

Code Comparison

paascloud-master:

@Configuration
@EnableResourceServer
public class ResourceServerConfig extends ResourceServerConfigurerAdapter {
    @Override
    public void configure(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
        http.authorizeRequests().antMatchers("/user/**").authenticated();
    }
}

yudao-cloud:

@Configuration
@EnableResourceServer
public class ResourceServerConfig extends ResourceServerConfigurerAdapter {
    @Override
    public void configure(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
        http.authorizeRequests().anyRequest().authenticated();
    }
}

Both projects use similar configurations for resource server setup, but paascloud-master applies authentication specifically to the "/user/**" path, while yudao-cloud authenticates all requests.

Pros of pig

• More mature project with a longer development history
• Larger community and more frequent updates
• Comprehensive documentation and tutorials available

Cons of pig

• Steeper learning curve for beginners
• Less modular architecture compared to yudao-cloud
• Heavier resource consumption in some scenarios

Code Comparison

pig:

@SneakyThrows
@Override
public void configure(HttpSecurity http) {
    http.authorizeRequests()
        .antMatchers("/token/**", "/actuator/**", "/mobile/**").permitAll()
        .anyRequest().authenticated()
        .and().csrf().disable();
}

yudao-cloud:

@Override
protected void configure(HttpSecurity httpSecurity) throws Exception {
    httpSecurity
        .csrf().disable()
        .authorizeRequests()
        .antMatchers("/auth/**", "/actuator/**").permitAll()
        .anyRequest().authenticated();
}

Both projects use Spring Security for authentication and authorization. The code snippets show similar configuration patterns, with pig using Lombok's @SneakyThrows annotation and yudao-cloud explicitly declaring the exception. pig allows additional endpoints (/mobile/**) compared to yudao-cloud.