Hi Carsten, I'd rather keep it, but... I don't actually see a good way to fix SLING-3859, so it might be more expedient to deprecate this. Or at least log a warning that the ResourceResolver must be manually closed.
Justin On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Carsten Ziegeler <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Justin, > > so either we have to fix the memory leak or go without it :) What do you > prefer? > > Regards > Carsten > > > 2014-08-20 13:52 GMT+02:00 Justin Edelson <[email protected]>: > >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 1:47 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Carsten Ziegeler <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> ...I think this adaption is conceptually wrong and I have no idea why >> we added >> >> this in the first place, so adding this to the memory leak problem, I >> would >> >> simply remove this thing.... >> > >> > It was added by Justin for SLING-2315 - I am ok with deprecating and >> > later removing it, but let's hear Justin. >> >> I find this to be of high utility when dealing with legacy code which >> only makes a Node object available. I don't actually know that I've >> ever used the Property adaptatation part, but I definitely use the >> Node -> Resource adaptation a few times a year. Could I live without >> it? Sure, especially as now that the ResourceResolverFactory code is >> much more complex than it was at the time. >> >> Justin >> >> > >> > -Bertrand >> > > > > -- > Carsten Ziegeler > Adobe Research Switzerland > [email protected]
