On 10/4/05, Costin Leau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello Christophe, > > Ok ! Now I understand you :-). The current code was build to make a > > prototype and discovering the JCR spec and now it is time to review all > > thinks. > > We have 2 possibitities : > > * Use distinct components : PersistenceManager and a JCR session object. > In > > this case, we can forget all methods like exist, logout, ... in the > > PersistenceManager > > * Use only the PersistenceManager which encapsulate the JCR session. but > in > > this case, we have to build a component manager/factory or other thinks > > which can initialise the PersistenceManager correctly. > > > Is is a good summary of our discussion ? What do you like solution 1 or > 2 ? > There are other possibilities: > 1. The Persistence Manager is configured per Repository and can > retrieve the session by itself. > 2. It's a variation of the first solution. The Manager contains only > persistence related methods but is still session-bound (it requires a > session). PersistenceManager dependencies however are initialized by > the manager itself - for example right now the developer has to take > care of converters and query manager even though this is not his > concern but actually the PersistenceManager; the internals have been > externalized.
What do you think if the persistence manager dependencies are initialised /injected by the Spring assembly script ? >>You mentioned something about OJB or Hibernate in the proposal. Take a > >>look at the Session interface (org.hibernate.Session) and trim it > >>down. > >>A simple interface would be: > >>add(Object) > >>remove(Object); > >>update(Object); > >>exists(Object); > >>Note I did not mention any path as this can be already present in the > >>XML mapping. If these basics are supported the path can be easily > >>added later. > > > So, you force to have in each object, the attribute "path" - Correct ? > It's just an idea to make a prototype at the beginning and then > generalize, not the other way around. And yes, the mapping has to > contain the path (the naming or if it's an attribute/property is not > important). Ok let do the prototype and we will see.
