[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-433?page=comments#action_12418972 ]
Tobias Bocanegra commented on JCR-433: -------------------------------------- i have concerns: - the static equals method might be very expensive - don't call equals(getSupertypes(), other.getSupertypes()), this is bad practice. rather call: NodeTypeDef.equals(getSupertypes(), other.getSupertypes()). are you sure this covers all cases correctly? if so, the nt:base errors in nodetype registry should be removed. i would prefer a proper nt:base check and automatic addition in the registry. > NodeTypeRegistry could auto-subtype from nt:base > ------------------------------------------------ > > Key: JCR-433 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-433 > Project: Jackrabbit > Type: Improvement > Components: nodetype > Versions: 1.0, 1.0.1, 0.9 > Reporter: Tobias Bocanegra > Assignee: Jukka Zitting > Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.1 > Attachments: jackrabbit-ntd-r41844.patch > > when tying to register a (primary) nodetype that does not extend from nt:base > the following error is > thrown: > "all primary node types except nt:base itself must be (directly or > indirectly) derived from nt:base" > since the registry is able to detect this error, it would be easy to > auto-subtype all nodetypes from nt:base. imo it's pointless to explzitely add > the nt:base to every supperclass set. as an analogy, you don't need to > 'extend from java.lang.Object' explicitely - the compiler does that > automatically for your. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
