Hi Nico, thanks for your explanations.
My point was unclear: I meant JR core would have more functionnality (and some new ones are still needed) with a little bit of documentation of this part. I would gladly work on this part with your help since I will need to understand some parts better than I currently do.
That sounds fantastic and I think we can all benefit from a documentation of your experience with the Jackrabbit core. I agree with you that the features like the hot backup/restore or clustering functionality are not even close to being complete in the current core. Nevertheless, I think that the amount of functionality missing in the core is both well-known and also finite. Personally, I don't think that we are looking at much more beyond the two mentioned features. Personally, I believe that for example a "restore" facility has to be buried deep down in the core and therefore the code has to comply with the high quality requirements that we have for code in the core and for the seasoned "Jackrabbit experience" of a developer. In my mind your experience with developing very close to the "heart" of Jackrabbit should not lead us to opening up the core so inexperienced Jackrabbit developers can contribute, but it should help us realize that we have very high requirements for Jackrabbit developers that make modifications to the core. While I agree that it would be great to make the core smaller and therefore offer more extension points, I think that both "backup/restore" and "clustering" have to go into the core and have to be developed very carefully and therefore are in my mind not really suited to be developed by inexperienced developers. Or in short: In hindsight I think it is questionable to offer the "Backup tool" as a Summer of Code Project. ...and please don't get me wrong, I can only blame myself for not speaking up at the time, but I didn't see it coming either. But I guess having this discussion now, is very valuable and will help us to make smarter decisions in the future. regards, david
