On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Carsten Ziegeler <[email protected]> wrote:
> ...I think we should go with Felix suggestion (which I think we already
> suggested some months ago) and provide a better interface for the
> resource type provider...

Agree, that makes sense, so we'd move from a JcrResourceTypeProvider
interface to a new ResourceTypeProvider one, that maps a Resource to a
path?

This would be not be backwards-compatible, so I think we need a vote
to remove JcrResourceTypeProvider - but adapting existing
implementations would be easy.

-Bertrand

Reply via email to