Angela Schreiber wrote:
Dominique Pfister wrote:
Hi Paco
On 08/09/2007, Paco Avila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorry, I missunderstood the code because confused "lock holder" and
"lock ownser" concepts :(
You're not the only one ;) "Lock owner" should rather have been named
"lock creator", the current term is absolutely misleading!
btw. for that reason that has been changed in jsr283:
quote from '6.9.4 Lock Owner' of the spec available for
public review:
"If the lock is open-scoped and its ownership is later switched to
another session, the jcr:lockOwner property is automatically changed
accordingly. In implementations that support simultaneous lock
ownership, the behavior of jcr:lockOwner on the addition of an owner is
implementation specific."
Thanks for bringing this up.
This change IMHO is an extremely bad idea, because it requires modifying
the persisted state of the lock, something which may not be possible to
build on top of existing systems (for instance, those which implement
the WebDAV locking model which so far has been a super-set of JCR locking).
BR, Julian
