[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCRVLT-544?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17372063#comment-17372063
]
Dominik Süß commented on JCRVLT-544:
------------------------------------
[~kwin] - I agree that based on what we know about component structures as of
today nt:folder (or even nt:unstructured) might have been a better choice. The
definition in itself is valid and leaves it up to the "client" (vault in this
case) to use other derivates. The nt:base case is bit unfortunate as it is
(atypically) a rather constrained "supertype".
The real world example that you can check within the AEM SDK would be
"cq-integration-searchpromote-content" (path:
/libs/foundation/components/page/productfeed ). This contains a substructure
under productfeed (childnode sp) which fails to install as productfeed gets set
up with nt:base.
> Creation of folders based on parent nodetype instead of nt:folder causing
> regression
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JCRVLT-544
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCRVLT-544
> Project: Jackrabbit FileVault
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: vlt
> Affects Versions: 3.4.4
> Reporter: Dominik Süß
> Priority: Major
>
> The change of JCRVLT-417 makes folder creation fall back to the nodetypes
> declared in the nodetype constraint of the primary type. This can cause
> regressions with existing packages.
> In the given case the nodetype cq:Component allows a child node definition
> with primaryType nt:base (which nt:folder derives from) - yet as nt:base has
> no childNodeDefinitions declared any substructures fail to install. The
> nodeType definition of cq:Component is correct as it "allows" anything
> deriving from nt:base, whereas only the derived nodeTypes open up further
> options like substructures.
> //cc [~kwin] introducing the behavioral change.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
