[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4898?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15669952#comment-15669952
]
Marcel Reutegger commented on OAK-4898:
---------------------------------------
bq. Making CommitInfo non null would require change in NodeStore
implementations also. That would also make code simpler. What do others think?
I'd be in favour of such a move, since your patch will lead to an incompatible
change of the Observer.contentChanged() contract anyway. But then, what about
existing code outside of Oak that currently implement Observer (e.g. Apache
Sling) and work according to the current contract?
>From Observer JavaDoc:
{quote}
A repository may capture the optional CommitInfo instance passed to a commit
and make it available to observers along with the committed content changes. In
such cases, i.e. when the commit info argument is non-nul}, the reported
content change is guaranteed to contain only changes from that specific commit
(and the applied commit hooks).
{quote}
> Allow for external changes to have a CommitInfo attached
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-4898
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4898
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
> Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
> Assignee: Chetan Mehrotra
> Fix For: 1.6
>
> Attachments: OAK-4898-v1.patch, OAK-4898-v2.patch
>
>
> Currently the observation logic relies on fact that CommitInfo being null
> means that changes are from other cluster node i.e. external changes.
> We should change this semantic and provide a different way to indicate that
> changes are external. This would allow a NodeStore implementation to still
> pass in a CommitInfo which captures useful information about commit like
> brief summary on what got changed which can be used for pre filtering
> (OAK-4796)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
