> Jukka Zitting wrote: > >> Writing basic-search isn't to hard if I could translate it > directly > >> into lucene queries, but...this of course it not a very nice thing > >> todo, because jackrabbit has this query grammar sets, but > I really do > >> not know how they work (not sure if i want to learn about > javacc) :-) > > > > How about exposing a "Lucene" query language at the Jackrabbit > > QueryManager level? This way a Jackrabbit-specific client > could bypass > > the XPath or SQL parsing and issue queries directly against the > > underlying Lucene index.
The problem with this approach is that a client shouldn't know about the lucene index structure. For example, if JCR-1080 is implemented, we don't want broken clients. > > I don't think that's a good idea. besides you don't have to > know javacc to write a new query syntax for jackrabbit. your > syntax implementation just need to transform a string > statement into a org.apache.jackrabbit.core.query.QueryNode tree. That is something I thought of, but not sure wether it is possible to translate everything into a QueryNode > > AFAIK Julian did something similar in his spi implementation. I might take a look at that later on, thanks for the pointer, -Ard > > regards > marcel >
