hi christian On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 6:40 AM, Christian Sprecher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all > > I have read several posts regarding current and future directions > regarding node type management. I see that an issue has been created > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-322), but the discussion > there seems to be stalled. > > What I am currently wondering is: how *should* node type management work > in your opinion? E.g. looking at the following scenarios: > * a new node type is defined requiring a (not yet) defined node type (as > mandatory property, for example) > 1: fails instantly > 2: fails the first time a node of such a type is created > 3: fails the first time such a node is persisted > (I would expect nr 3)
IMO node type registration should fail instantly, similar to an RDBMS, where you can't create a table with an unknown column type (AFAIK). > > * a property is declared as being mandatory, but there are existing > nodes of this node type having no such property > 1: fails instantly > 2: assumes a default value for this property > 3: fails the first time such a node is persisted (being either a new or > an updated one) > (hmm, no clue here :)) IMO 1. > > * a node type is removed, but is used in another node type definition > 1: fails instantly > 2: replaces all appearances of this node type with its parent up the > hierarchy (hmm, might be tough with multiple inheritance, but hey :)) 1. > > * what does happen with older versions of nodes that become incompatible > with the new definition? Are node types versioned too? node types are unfortuantely not versioned; existing nodes which are incompatible with the current node type definition should IMO be prevented. cheers stefan > > > I am sure that there are more scenarios, but currently I am more > interested in your general stance on this issue. Especially what is to > be considered part of JCR 2.0 standard and what will be > jackrabbit-specific. > > Thx for your feedback > > > > > > > > > >
