hi jukka
How about an alternative of merging just jcr2spi to spi-commons and
leaving spi2jcr as a separate component like spi2dav?
hm... i don't like it.
This would support the long term goal of getting rid of the separate
transient space implementations in core and jcr2spi, as it would be
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 1:53 AM, Lennard Fuller lful...@unicon.net wrote:
I agree with Felix. JCR-RMI definitely has it drawbacks (perf is HORRIBLE).
However, it is easy to use and until the dav based communications is at least
as easy, JCR-RMI should not be dropped.
Easy to use
Hi Jukka,
Just for my clarification ... is it at the moment possible to configure
the WebDavServlet to connect to a remote Repository over spi2dav ?
greets
claus
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Angela Schreiber anch...@day.com wrote:
This would support the long term goal of getting rid of the separate
transient space implementations in core and jcr2spi, as it would be
easier for core to reuse stuff from jcr2spi.
if this is the aim of the whole
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1456?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12768133#action_12768133
]
Jukka Zitting commented on JCR-1456:
I gave a quick look at the current state in the
Hi,
Jukka Zitting schrieb:
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Angela Schreiber anch...@day.com wrote:
This would support the long term goal of getting rid of the separate
transient space implementations in core and jcr2spi, as it would be
easier for core to reuse stuff from jcr2spi.
if
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1456?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jukka Zitting updated JCR-1456:
---
Attachment: JCR-1456.patch
Attached a patch showing the full set of changes between the JCR-1456
Hi,
The current jackrabbit-jcr-client component contains a RepositoryFactory
implementation
Yes, and only this class. Can we get delete this component, or what
are the plans?
1) Is there a reason why this generic RepositoryFactory implementation
couldn't go to jackrabbit-jcr-commons?
This
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1456?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12768210#action_12768210
]
Thomas Mueller commented on JCR-1456:
-
Is the 20% slowdown problem solved? I think that
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1456?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12768219#action_12768219
]
Stefan Guggisberg commented on JCR-1456:
Is the 20% slowdown problem solved? I think
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1456?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12768226#action_12768226
]
Martijn Hendriks commented on JCR-1456:
---
I think that the testWhileIdle approach for
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCRBENCH-1?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jukka Zitting resolved JCRBENCH-1.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Done.
Move jcr-benchmark to JCR Commons
-
Remove the jcr-benchmark dependency to jcr-tests
Key: JCRBENCH-3
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCRBENCH-3
Project: Jackrabbit JCR Benchmark
Issue Type: Improvement
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1456?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12768238#action_12768238
]
Stefan Guggisberg commented on JCR-1456:
[...] Is that enough, or should we do some
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1456?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12768244#action_12768244
]
Thomas Mueller commented on JCR-1456:
-
Is that enough
That's enough, thanks.
Could you
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1456?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12768247#action_12768247
]
Martijn Hendriks commented on JCR-1456:
---
Sure, I'll describe what I did as precisely as
infinite recursion creating a nodeType based on an existing nodeType
Key: JCR-2359
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2359
Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
Hi,
(was: Re: Merging jcr2spi and spi2jcr to spi-commons)
Jackrabbit should be *one* jar file. Easier for development, testing,
and deployment. (The only reason to split the jar file would be to
save disk space, but then we should first reduce the dependencies).
Regards,
Thomas
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2357?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12768280#action_12768280
]
Marcel Reutegger commented on JCR-2357:
---
so it looks like the doc number is an
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2357?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12768287#action_12768287
]
Benjamin Papez edited comment on JCR-2357 at 10/21/09 3:41 PM:
---
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2357?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12768287#action_12768287
]
Benjamin Papez commented on JCR-2357:
-
does that mean your listeners are
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2359?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12768288#action_12768288
]
Stefan Guggisberg commented on JCR-2359:
same as JCR-2143 which has been fixed in
Hi,
Thomas Müller schrieb:
Hi,
(was: Re: Merging jcr2spi and spi2jcr to spi-commons)
Jackrabbit should be *one* jar file. Easier for development, testing,
and deployment. (The only reason to split the jar file would be to
save disk space, but then we should first reduce the
Hi,
Thomas Müller schrieb:
Hi,
The current jackrabbit-jcr-client component contains a RepositoryFactory
implementation
Yes, and only this class. Can we get delete this component, or what
are the plans?
1) Is there a reason why this generic RepositoryFactory implementation
couldn't
Hi,
I would not do relative paths, this becomes very unstable.
That's true. We could start with absolute path only. More features can
still be added later on if required (ideas: supporting ~ prefix,
supporting system property expansion).
Instead of a new class with a constructor, I would add
Hi,
Thomas Müller schrieb:
Hi,
I would not do relative paths, this becomes very unstable.
That's true. We could start with absolute path only. More features can
still be added later on if required (ideas: supporting ~ prefix,
supporting system property expansion).
As I said, I am -1 on
26 matches
Mail list logo
