[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-89?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13270346#comment-13270346
]
Michael Dürig commented on OAK-89:
----------------------------------
Thinking a bit more about this, I'm fine with using checked exceptions.
However, in that case we *should not* use a common base exception because this
would defy the initial reasoning for using checked exceptions: it would easily
result in code where the base exception could be thrown by virtually every
method and "we'll just end up treating it as a generic "I can just throw this
without worrying about the design consequences" -exception" as was Jukka's
concern for unchecked exceptions.
We should rather use very specific exceptions which have a very limited local
scope.
> Improve exception handling
> --------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-89
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-89
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core, jcr
> Affects Versions: 0.2.1
> Reporter: Michael Dürig
>
> As discusses on the @oak-dev list [1] we need to improve the way exceptions
> are thrown and handled.
> I suggest to create a OakException which extends from RuntimeException and
> encapsulate a RepositoryException into it. These exceptions can then be
> handled where appropriate. We can the later turn this into a more
> sophisticated mechanism where the OakException is mapped to a corresponding
> RepositoryException by an injected mapping (see Jukka's proposal in the
> discussion).
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/t5czrpkvyamn7sym
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
