I think it's a good idea, as long as we don't have to keep those interfaces there for backcompatibility, and we can drop them quickly. Regards, Esteban Franqueiro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________________ De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] en nombre de Tobias Bocanegra Enviado el: jue 08/05/2008 16:48 Para: [email protected] Asunto: extending the jackrabbit-api hi, as the implementation of the new features for jsr283 have started, i suggest to put the new jsr283 interfaces to jackrabbit-api instead to core (where possible). this way, we can already figure out inter-module dependency issues and people can start using experimental features through an API than rather through casting objects to core interfaces. suggestion: use 'org.apache.jackrabbit.api.jsr283' as base package for the new jsr283 interfaces and classes. for example, use org.apache.jackrabbit.api.jsr283.nodetype.NodeDefinitionTemplate for the future javax.jcr.nodetype.NodeDefinitionTemplate once jcr2.0 is released, we can either extend them from the 'real' interfaces or just drop them. in any case it might make sense to mark them as deprecated from start. WDYT? -- regards, toby Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
