On 11.4.12 18:54, Jukka Zitting wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Michael Dürig<[email protected]> wrote:
The current API should be able to cope with transient modifications and
non-transient modifications. The latter can be done by obtaining a new
connection just for those changes.
IMHO a separate connection shouldn't be needed for that, just a
separate commit() against the same base state.
That would be a better solution I agree. Currently Connection.commit()
does an implicit refresh. We'd need to change that and do an explicit
refresh on the connection from the caller when needed.
The name reflects "transient" from JCR and should emphasis the fact that
instances of this class are - in contrast to NodeState - not Immutable.
However, we could rename this not MutableNodeState or something different if
you prefer.
I'd rather not call such an interface *NodeState, as that suggests
something that ISA NodeState, and thus a specialization, not a
generalization of the supertype contract.
Agreed. But in lack of a better name...
Michael
BR,
Jukka Zitting
