[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7570?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16524768#comment-16524768
]
Michael Dürig edited comment on OAK-7570 at 6/27/18 8:43 AM:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Another point I just realised: Wouldn't it make more since to move the
implementation of {{HttpBinaryProvider}} to the value factory? After all
{{ValueFactory}} already has a method for creating binaries from input streams.
This probably implies to split {{HttpBinaryProvider}} into
* a {{HttpBinaryFactory}} implemented by the value factory and responsible for
creating binaries by uploading them to the blob store
* a {{HttpBinary}} implemented by binaries and exposing a method to retrieve
the download URI.
was (Author: mduerig):
Another point I just realised: Wouldn't it make more since to move the
implementation of \{{HttpBinaryProvider}} to the value factory? After all
{{ValueFactory}} already has a method for creating binaries from input streams.
> [DirectBinaryAccess][DISCUSS] Client access via DataStoreBlobStore directly
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-7570
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7570
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Technical task
> Components: blob-plugins
> Reporter: Matt Ryan
> Assignee: Matt Ryan
> Priority: Major
>
> Open discussion related to OAK-7569:
> The [original pull request|https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/pull/88]
> proposes changes to oak-api, oak-segment-tar, oak-store-document, oak-core,
> and oak-jcr as well as oak-blob-plugins, oak-blob-cloud, and oak-blob-azure.
> Would it be possible / better to keep the changes local to the oak-blob-*
> bundles and avoid making changes throughout the stack?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
