[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-680?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12462176
]
Tobias Bocanegra commented on JCR-680:
--
I agreed with stefan that it's a bit hard to understand how it works.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-680?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12462186
]
Jukka Zitting commented on JCR-680:
---
I agreed with stefan that it's a bit hard to understand how it works.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-680?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12461995
]
Stefan Guggisberg commented on JCR-680:
---
This patch fixes JCR-320 and notably simplifies the Value classes.
it
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-680?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12462051
]
Jukka Zitting commented on JCR-680:
---
it might be just my lack of understanding but the proposed redesign
is IMO
Hi Jukka,
So far I thought 'values' is quite a simple concept, and with some
exceptions (for example the problems with streams) I thought it should
be possible to implement it in a simple way. To tell you the truth, I
don't understand the class diagram. For me, it is very complex, I'm
confused.
Hi,
On 12/27/06, Thomas Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So far I thought 'values' is quite a simple concept, and with some
exceptions (for example the problems with streams) I thought it should
be possible to implement it in a simple way. To tell you the truth, I
don't understand the class
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-680?page=comments#action_12460441 ]
Stefan Guggisberg commented on JCR-680:
---
* Support for namespace remappings in NAME and PATH values
is this a requirement? IMO the spec doesn't mandate it.
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-680?page=comments#action_12460456 ]
Jukka Zitting commented on JCR-680:
---
* Support for namespace remappings in NAME and PATH values
is this a requirement? IMO the spec doesn't mandate it.
The
Hi,
The rationale for proposing a revolutionary rewrite rather than incrementally
improving the existing Value implementation is that the basic design of the
existing implementation doesn't allow easy extension or customization.
What kind of extension / customization do you have in mind?
Hi,
On 12/22/06, Thomas Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The rationale for proposing a revolutionary rewrite rather than incrementally
improving the existing Value implementation is that the basic design of the
existing implementation doesn't allow easy extension or customization.
What kind
10 matches
Mail list logo
