[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OCM-58?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ard Schrijvers resolved OCM-58.
---
Resolution: Fixed
Make OCM jackrabbit independent and rely on JCR 2.0 only
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OCM-55?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ard Schrijvers resolved OCM-55.
---
Resolution: Fixed
Replace commons logging LogFactory with slf4j LoggerFactory
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OCM-52?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ard Schrijvers updated OCM-52:
--
Summary: Replace inefficient ObjectContentManagerImpl#getObjects(Class
objectClass, String path) path
The Apache Jenkins build system has built Jackrabbit-trunk (build #1922)
Status: Failure
Check console output at https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit-trunk/1922/ to
view the results.
angela created JCR-3360:
---
Summary: Performance degradation in concurrent performance tests
due to list of open sessions
Key: JCR-3360
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3360
Project: Jackrabbit
Michael Dürig created JCR-3361:
--
Summary: Observation tests (wrongly) assume the repository
supports event bundling
Key: JCR-3361
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3361
Project: Jackrabbit
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3361?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13402206#comment-13402206
]
Michael Dürig commented on JCR-3361:
Candidates for the wrong assumption:
*
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3361?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13402206#comment-13402206
]
Michael Dürig edited comment on JCR-3361 at 6/27/12 1:10 PM:
-
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3361?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13402213#comment-13402213
]
Michael Dürig commented on JCR-3361:
Basically all observation tests which use
Hi Betrand,
FWIW, as a Sling user I agree that the freeze my view of the
repository for a while, whatever others are doing feature looks like
a useful one to expose over an Oak HTTP remoting layer.
Do you mean having a consistent snapshot of the data at a given point in
time? Yes, we want to
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OCM-52?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ard Schrijvers resolved OCM-52.
---
Resolution: Fixed
Replace inefficient ObjectContentManagerImpl#getObjects(Class objectClass,
The Apache Jenkins build system has built Jackrabbit-trunk (build #1923)
Status: Still Failing
Check console output at https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit-trunk/1923/ to
view the results.
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Thomas Mueller muel...@adobe.com wrote:
But this feature is unrelated to the branch/merge / workspace feature that
Jukka proposed here (at least as far as I understand).
The branch feature goes a bit beyond what Bertrand describes in that
it is read-write
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OCM-35?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ard Schrijvers updated OCM-35:
--
Resolution: Invalid
Status: Resolved (was: Patch Available)
there is no ocm dtd any more afaics
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OCM-34?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ard Schrijvers updated OCM-34:
--
Resolution: Fixed
Assignee: Ard Schrijvers
Status: Resolved (was: Patch Available)
applied
Ard Schrijvers created OCM-60:
-
Summary: Remove RequestObjectCacheImpl as it seems very brittle,
error prone, and cleared very frequently any way
Key: OCM-60
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OCM-60
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OCM-4?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ard Schrijvers updated OCM-4:
-
Resolution: Duplicate
Assignee: Ard Schrijvers
Status: Resolved (was: Patch Available)
will be
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OCM-29?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ard Schrijvers resolved OCM-29.
---
Resolution: Won't Fix
Assignee: Ard Schrijvers
see OCM-60
Cache framework
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OCM-44?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ard Schrijvers resolved OCM-44.
---
Resolution: Won't Fix
Assignee: Ard Schrijvers
it returns null of does not exist, an exception if
The Apache Jenkins build system has built Jackrabbit-trunk (build #1924)
Status: Still Failing
Check console output at https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit-trunk/1924/ to
view the results.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2950?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13402294#comment-13402294
]
Julian Reschke commented on JCR-2950:
-
Test results:
2.4:
14124 16763 19368 19210
13848
Claus Köll created JCR-3362:
---
Summary: Use a basic form for audit logs
Key: JCR-3362
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3362
Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
Issue Type:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3362?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Claus Köll updated JCR-3362:
Attachment: JCR-3362.patch
Use a basic form for audit logs
---
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3362?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Claus Köll updated JCR-3362:
Status: Patch Available (was: Open)
Use a basic form for audit logs
---
hi jukka
makes a lot of sense to me and pretty matches the goal of he
whole JSOP approach.
there is just one thing i don't feel totally comfortable with:
By default the HTTP binding could simply use a fresh new session for
each HTTP request, but it should be possible for a client to request a
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Angela Schreiber anch...@adobe.com wrote:
a) is it on purpose that the value constructors are public?
The value classes are package-private, which also limits the
visibility of the constructors. Having the constructors public is just
a personal stylistic
Hi,
Am 27.06.2012 um 11:20 schrieb Jukka Zitting:
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Angela Schreiber anch...@adobe.com wrote:
i don't fully see the use case for such long living sessions.
FWIW, this was my first thought, too: This completely breaks stateless-ness of
HTTP and
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Felix Meschberger fmesc...@adobe.com wrote:
FWIW, this was my first thought, too: This completely breaks stateless-ness
of HTTP and introduces the use of Sessions.
I think you're misreading the proposal. The feature uses separate URI
spaces so all
Hi,
Am 27.06.2012 um 12:13 schrieb Jukka Zitting:
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Felix Meschberger fmesc...@adobe.com
wrote:
FWIW, this was my first thought, too: This completely breaks stateless-ness
of HTTP and introduces the use of Sessions.
I think you're misreading the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-153?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13402151#comment-13402151
]
Felix Meschberger commented on OAK-153:
---
.bq The lifecycle of such hooks is up to the
On 27.6.12 12:50, Felix Meschberger wrote:
Hi,
Am 27.06.2012 um 12:13 schrieb Jukka Zitting:
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Felix Meschberger fmesc...@adobe.com wrote:
FWIW, this was my first thought, too: This completely breaks stateless-ness
of HTTP and introduces the use of
Hi,
I understand the point Felix is making. As of now, I would propose to drop
separate URI spaces.
I would also propose to drop the related MicroKernel branch/merge feature,
or at least not rely on the feature to be available. In my view, the
MicroKernel branch/merge feature which was
Hi,
Am 27.06.2012 um 13:49 schrieb Michael Dürig:
On 27.6.12 12:50, Felix Meschberger wrote:
Hi,
Am 27.06.2012 um 12:13 schrieb Jukka Zitting:
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Felix Meschberger fmesc...@adobe.com
wrote:
FWIW, this was my first thought, too: This completely
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Angela Schreiber anch...@adobe.com wrote:
i don't fully see the use case for such long living sessions.
The rationale is the same as for the branch feature we added to the
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Felix Meschberger fmesc...@adobe.com wrote:
Hi,
Am 27.06.2012 um 11:20 schrieb Jukka Zitting:
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Angela Schreiber anch...@adobe.com wrote:
i don't fully see the use case for such long living sessions.
FWIW, this was my
hi jukka
On 6/27/12 11:43 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Angela Schreiberanch...@adobe.com wrote:
a) is it on purpose that the value constructors are public?
The value classes are package-private, which also limits the
visibility of the constructors. Having the
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Felix Meschberger fmesc...@adobe.com wrote:
Its not about shared state but about state maintained on the server which
means
the exchange is not stateless any longer.
I don't follow this argument; the entire repository is one big piece
of server-side
hi stefan
i thought that we have a consensus of how the oak stack should be layered, i.e.
that was my understanding as well
app / sling / oak-jcr (trans. space) / [remoting /] oak-core [remoting
/] oak-mk.
or alternatively:
app / non-java-content-repo-api / [remoting/] oak-core
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Stefan Guggisberg
stefan.guggisb...@gmail.com wrote:
now your proposal seems to imply a different architecture...
You're reading far too much into this. I'm just thinking of exposing a
feature that seems like it could come in handy for some potential
Hi,
Ah ! Sounds much better now. Thanks alot for the clarification.
So
$ curl -X DELETE http://localhost:8080/branch/X
would in fact drop the branch, right ?
Regards
Felix
Am 27.06.2012 um 15:00 schrieb Jukka Zitting:
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Felix Meschberger
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Felix Meschberger fmesc...@adobe.com wrote:
Ah ! Sounds much better now. Thanks alot for the clarification.
So
$ curl -X DELETE http://localhost:8080/branch/X
would in fact drop the branch, right ?
Indeed.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
Hi
On 27.06.12 15:07, Jukka Zitting wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Stefan Guggisberg
stefan.guggisb...@gmail.com wrote:
now your proposal seems to imply a different architecture...
You're reading far too much into this. I'm just thinking of exposing a
feature that seems
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
As suggested in OAK-104 [1] and discussed briefly before, I think it
would be useful for Oak to have a native HTTP binding that allows
remote clients to talk directly with oak-core without having to go
through
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Stefan Guggisberg
stefan.guggisb...@gmail.com wrote:
now your proposal seems to imply a different architecture...
You're reading far too much into this.
well, statements like
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Stefan Guggisberg
stefan.guggisb...@gmail.com wrote:
well, statements like the following lead me to this assumption:
OK, I can see how I could have given such an impression. Sorry about
the poor wording. With clients in this context I meant just the
clients
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith m...@pooteeweet.org wrote:
i assume this session space will not cause duplicating the rest of the
workspace
content that hasnt changed, right?
Right. No physical duplication of content takes place.
if we also make it possible to sync
46 matches
Mail list logo
