Agreed
Carsten
Felix Meschberger wrote:
Hi all,
Looking at what is in the jcr/base module right now, I think we do not
have to change the name.
The bundle has two dependencies on Jackrabbit and its API: One is the
node type loader which uses Jackrabbit API and the second is the
RepositoryAccessor which uses the jackrabbit-jcr-rmi library to access a
remote repository over RMI.
Looking at the jcr/api reveals, that this bundle actually exports the
Jackrabbit API, so it also has a dependency to Jackrabbit - and we never
discussed renaming that.
Of course, in Sling the jcr/base is only referred to by the
jackrabbit-server and jackrabbit-client bundles. But other integrators
of Sling may use the jcr/base module and extend it for their own JCR
implementation used.
Regards
Felix
Am Freitag, den 22.02.2008, 09:52 +0100 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 9:31 AM, Carsten Ziegeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
... jcr/commons is fine if it's not tied to jackrabbit :)
Otherwise I would prefer a "jackrabbit" somehow in the name....
ok, so that'd be jackrabbit-base then.
The RepositoryAccessor class uses some convenience classes from
Jackrabbit - not sure if those are really tied to Jackrabbit vs. other
JCR repositories, but it's still good to indicate that in the name.
-Bertrand
--
Carsten Ziegeler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
