Felix Meschberger wrote: > Hi, > > Am Mittwoch, den 02.01.2008, 12:00 +0200 schrieb Jukka Zitting: >> Hi, >> >> On Jan 2, 2008 10:18 AM, Carsten Ziegeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> My changes to the code use (some ugly) method reflection instead of >>> relying on a specific interface. We could either go this way (in addition >>> we could also check if the repository in question implements the >>> interface by checking for the interface *name*) or we could require >>> that the jackrabbit api is put into a shared class loader. For ease >>> of use I would go the first way. >> The "correct" solution would IMHO be to have the Jackrabbit API in a >> shared class loader, just like the JCR API. > > I completely agree. > > And no, there is no third solution, because the second is the right > one :-) > Oh :(
Ok, if the second solution is the right one this means that in this case more or less the whole jcr api bundle should not be used but these classes should be loaded via the root class loader, right? Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
