[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4938?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15584922#comment-15584922
 ] 

Marcel Reutegger commented on OAK-4938:
---------------------------------------

In my view it would be best to revisit manipulation of the _id field in 
general. An UpdateOp already contains the id and it is evident from the new 
flag whether the _id should be set. I think we should try to get rid of the 
explicit set _id operation and expect that the store implementation handles the 
_id automatically.

> clarify contract for UpdateOp with missing operation on _id
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OAK-4938
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4938
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: documentmk
>            Reporter: Julian Reschke
>            Assignee: Julian Reschke
>            Priority: Minor
>
> See OAK-4937



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to