On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Having to use both the Resource and JCR interfacts in Sling might not > be optimal, but it allows us to do more than if we were to use just > JCR. > > With this in mind, I agree with Felix and Carsten about the proposed > changes, but I think we must be very careful to not bloat the extra > layers of Sling. The proposed changes do improve the current > situation, without adding complexity or new layers, IMHO, so I'm +1 on > them.
ACK! Felix's proposal basically just makes the whole resource tree "creation" more flexible and extendable, while the resource api (and it's inherent duplication of the JCR API) would still be the same as it is already now. Which means as long as we have no mounting features in JCR or Jackrabbit, this is a good way to go. We still concentrate on JCR; as an example, the recent threads about using different workspaces depending on the requests show that the new mechanism helps to leverage JCR features, which were previously not possible to use. Regards, Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
