Re: 1.0 or 2.0
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 01:03, Phukan, Anit anit_phu...@intuit.com wrote: Has anyone configured the repository.xml to use JNDI look up for making DB connections instead of directly specifying DB URLs with userid/password in the repository.xml? See http://wiki.apache.org/jackrabbit/UsingJNDIDataSource Regards, Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek alexander.klimetsc...@day.com
RE: 1.0 or 2.0
Do I have to initialize the repository in my code in a different way to include the initialContext/lookup? I am also trying to read the datasource details from a properties.xml file. Till now I was using Repository repository = new TransientRepository(); Thanks for the help. Anit -Original Message- From: Alexander Klimetschek [mailto:aklim...@day.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 2:12 AM To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org Subject: Re: 1.0 or 2.0 On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 01:03, Phukan, Anit anit_phu...@intuit.com wrote: Has anyone configured the repository.xml to use JNDI look up for making DB connections instead of directly specifying DB URLs with userid/password in the repository.xml? See http://wiki.apache.org/jackrabbit/UsingJNDIDataSource Regards, Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek alexander.klimetsc...@day.com
Re: 1.0 or 2.0
On 11 Nov 2009, at 12:50:33 PM, Phukan, Anit wrote: Do I have to initialize the repository in my code in a different way to include the initialContext/lookup? I am also trying to read the datasource details from a properties.xml file. Till now I was using Repository repository = new TransientRepository(); You use the usual context lookup methods. See the following for an example of using both. http://kenai.com/projects/jcrmanager/sources/svn/content/trunk/src/app/com/sptci/jcr/SessionManager.java?rev=40
Re: 1.0 or 2.0
On 10 Nov 2009, at 12:25:08 PM, ChadDavis wrote: 2) If I go with 1.6, how difficult will a later migration to 2.0 be? What are the factors? I am currently working on migrating from 1.6 to 2 beta. I do not have any data yet (just code), but I assume XML import/export will work. The major issue I ran into was that XPath is deprecated in 2.0, so I have to rewrite all my queries. It is a bit sad, since I preferred the XPath syntax to SQL. From what I have seen of the API (the parts that I have used), 2.0 has only added features. It is better now since you do have standard calls to manage workspaces (which I needed). Rakesh
Re: 1.0 or 2.0
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Rakesh Vidyadharan rak...@sptci.com wrote: On 10 Nov 2009, at 12:25:08 PM, ChadDavis wrote: 2) If I go with 1.6, how difficult will a later migration to 2.0 be? What are the factors? I am currently working on migrating from 1.6 to 2 beta. I do not have any data yet (just code), but I assume XML import/export will work. The major issue I ran into was that XPath is deprecated in 2.0, so I have to rewrite all my queries. It is a bit sad, since I preferred the XPath syntax to SQL. The only option in 2.0 is SQL?
Re: 1.0 or 2.0
On Nov 10, 2009, at 2:43 PM, ChadDavis chadmichaelda...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Rakesh Vidyadharan rak...@sptci.com wrote: On 10 Nov 2009, at 12:25:08 PM, ChadDavis wrote: 2) If I go with 1.6, how difficult will a later migration to 2.0 be? What are the factors? I am currently working on migrating from 1.6 to 2 beta. I do not have any data yet (just code), but I assume XML import/export will work. The major issue I ran into was that XPath is deprecated in 2.0, so I have to rewrite all my queries. It is a bit sad, since I preferred the XPath syntax to SQL. The only option in 2.0 is SQL? There is JQOM if you like expressing your queries as java objects and functions. XPath is not dead yet, but since it is deprecated, one cannot count on it being available down the road.
Re: 1.0 or 2.0
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 22:53, Rakesh Vidyadharan rak...@sptci.com wrote: There is JQOM if you like expressing your queries as java objects and functions. XPath is not dead yet, but since it is deprecated, one cannot count on it being available down the road. Jackrabbit will continue to include the XPath query support as it is now, for some releases. I certainly prefer it as well. However, innovation might happen only in JQOM... Regards, Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek alexander.klimetsc...@day.com
Re: 1.0 or 2.0
So, is 2.0 going to see a stable release in the next month? On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Alexander Klimetschek aklim...@day.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 22:53, Rakesh Vidyadharan rak...@sptci.com wrote: There is JQOM if you like expressing your queries as java objects and functions. XPath is not dead yet, but since it is deprecated, one cannot count on it being available down the road. Jackrabbit will continue to include the XPath query support as it is now, for some releases. I certainly prefer it as well. However, innovation might happen only in JQOM... Regards, Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek alexander.klimetsc...@day.com
RE: 1.0 or 2.0
Hi, Has anyone configured the repository.xml to use JNDI look up for making DB connections instead of directly specifying DB URLs with userid/password in the repository.xml? I would appreciate if someone could provide some pointers. Thanks Anit -Original Message- From: ChadDavis [mailto:chadmichaelda...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 2:41 PM To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org Subject: Re: 1.0 or 2.0 So, is 2.0 going to see a stable release in the next month? On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Alexander Klimetschek aklim...@day.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 22:53, Rakesh Vidyadharan rak...@sptci.com wrote: There is JQOM if you like expressing your queries as java objects and functions. XPath is not dead yet, but since it is deprecated, one cannot count on it being available down the road. Jackrabbit will continue to include the XPath query support as it is now, for some releases. I certainly prefer it as well. However, innovation might happen only in JQOM... Regards, Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek alexander.klimetsc...@day.com
