[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOTARK-66?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12982683#action_12982683
]
Sriskandarajah Suhothayan commented on PHOTARK-66:
--------------------------------------------------
It builds and runs without any issues.
But I found that org.apache.photark.jcr.services.JCRAlbumAggregator has no
connection with org.apache.photark.services.album.AlbumAgregator
though they have similar methods and functionality.
I believe it would be better if you can generalize JCRAlbumAggregator using
AlbumAgregator.
> Improve the album storage structure in photark (trunk) local jcr
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: PHOTARK-66
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOTARK-66
> Project: PhotArk
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Environment: Linux
> Reporter: Subash Chaturanga
> Attachments: changedJCRStructure.patch,
> changedJCRStructureUpdate_1.patch, changedJCRStructureUpdate_2.patch,
> Screenshot.png
>
> Original Estimate: 96h
> Remaining Estimate: 96h
>
> Currently in photark trunk, all albums are directly put under the root of
> local jcr regardless of the album type. Currently photark has basically two
> main album types, local and remote (flicker and picasa). So If the local jcr
> structure is much more organized in trunk such that it stores each album type
> under the relevant category. Hence in future when some more other album
> types introduces it won't be too complex in the jcr level also. And it is
> efficient and fast, when we do jcr operations where we don't need to go
> through the whole album list each time, when we want to acquire all albums of
> one particular type.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
