Jumping in here, where the thread developed to a discussion about the
repository implementation of orderable Nodes.
I like to come back to the use-cases needed.
These can be summarized that I expect a certain order upon access of the Node's
NodeIterator.
In any cases I had in CQ there was never
+1
btw IMHO you need not go for a vote for incremental change in version
number of an existing library. Vote would be helpful when a new
library need to be introduced and that too in compile time
dependencies. For other case just opening a JIRA Task and making the
change against that task should
The Buildbot has detected a restored build on builder oak-trunk-win7 while
building ASF Buildbot.
Full details are available at:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/oak-trunk-win7/builds/455
Buildbot URL: http://ci.apache.org/
Buildslave for this Build: bb-win7
Build Reason: scheduler
Build Source
On 5.8.14 12:22 , Christian Keller wrote:
Jumping in here, where the thread developed to a discussion about the
repository implementation of orderable Nodes.
I like to come back to the use-cases needed.
These can be summarized that I expect a certain order upon access of the Node's
Hi,
The proposed update sounds good, you should go for it.
There is no need for a vote beforehand, a Jira issue with a patch attached
works just fine.
best,
alex
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Chetan Mehrotra chetan.mehro...@gmail.com
wrote:
+1
btw IMHO you need not go for a vote for
Von: Michael Dürig mdue...@apache.org
Gesendet: Dienstag, 5. August 2014 13:37
An: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: How to implement a queue in Oak?
In any cases I had in CQ there was never a requirement of strict ordering.
But it was used
Hi Davide,
Is it right? don't we want to run the integration testing as well?
Adding the integration tests to the release checks won't hurt.
Is this script used by jackrabbit as well or is used only by oak?
Both projects use the same script, and it would be good to not introduce
any oak
