hi brian, in crx have something called a "crx package"
if you export [1] content with a crx package all the dependencies to nodetype-definitions and namespaces are included. upon import [2] all those definitions are automatically registered again. feel free to test by downloading the trial version of crx. is that what you are looking for? [possibly with an additional checkbox on export that says "[ ] export nt's & ns's only" if that should cover your usecase i am sure we could wrap this into a command line option of the content repository. [ and possibly port that tool over to jackrabbit sometime ;) ] regards, david [1] http://jsr170tools.day.com/crx/zipper/index.jsp [2] http://jsr170tools.day.com/crx/loader/index.jsp On 6/23/05, Brian Moseley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Oliver Kiessler wrote: > > > your project sounds interesting. In the graffito project we just > > started to work on something similiar. It is a jackrabbit based jcr > > object mapping framework. You might be interested to have a look at > > it: > > > > http://incubator.apache.org/graffito/ > > http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/incubator/graffito/trunk/jcr-mapping/ > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GRFT-23 > > > > Maybe we can work together on this. > > sure. i'd rather not duplicate effort :) and i'd rather not maintain > such a tool for the long run, as i don't have a large development > community and want to concentrate on my main project. > > my tool is *extremely* simple. i hadn't considered the dependencies > described in the jira issue, mainly because i haven't encountered them > in the node types i'm registering. > > my requirements are 1) that i can run the tool from maven or the command > line so that i can create and populate the repository for my server when > building a distribution of the server and 2) that using the tool does > not force me to use the rest of your mapping layer. > > while i'm definitely interested in the mapping layer, my jcr needs right > now are extremely simple, and i'd rather keep my small amount of jcr > client code than track another evolving, pre-alpha api - it's hard > enough keeping up with jackrabbit :) when your mapping stuff is farther > along, tho, i will definitely look to use it. > > so what are your plans for node type registration? i noticed that you've > defined an interface but have no implementation yet. > >
