On 2.12.13 9:06 , Marcel Reutegger wrote:
Where required we could expose those implementations through the Oak
>API, which would then later on overlap the JCR 2.1 API.
do you mean JCR interface extensions in Oak or the actual Oak API in oak-core?
I wouldn't do the first now for the same reasons you stated about creating a
dependency to the JCR 2.1. API. the spec is not yet final. the latter may be
OK since the methods are in a different layer anyway.
I was thinking of the first since further changes seem rather unlikely.
However I'm also fine with a more conservative approach where we only
add such temporary APIs where required (i.e. applications wanting to use
new functionality).
Michael
