Hi there,

 

I'm sorry to inform you that we did not select Jackrabbit as the CMS of the 
platform we're currently developing (well designing right now).

We'll develop our own CMS, of course not generic as Jackrabbit could be (and 
this is to be discussed...), but more suitable to our needs.

 

Why we rejected Jackrabbit :

-          lack of administration possibilities: It is currently impossible in 
JR to modify an existing node type, to add/modify/remove properties. 
Refactoring is important for us, and impossible in Jackrabbit.

-          Strong constraints on the repository structure : we saw in the 
different mailing lists that Jackrabbit works (quite) well with a specific 
architecture, and that not following it induces very important and unacceptable 
performance loss (both for writing and searching);

-          Search is also a (very) important feature for us, and currently 
Jackrabbit is much too limited in this area. SQL is not complete (well we don't 
need full SQL, but at least....joins...); and xpath is limited also, 
dereferencing is impossible or must be developed as an upper layer above 
Jackrabbit.

 

Some details also maybe, but most important problems are the three listed above 
(admin, repository structure and search). I think Jackrabbit is good to create 
a blogging system, a forum or any article-based simple website, but it is 
definitely not suitable for professional, generic CMS. This is too bad, because 
some (who said most?) apache projects are really top quality projects that even 
professional softwares can rely on, and I thought Jackrabbit would follow this 
path. I agree that it's still a young project, maybe versions 2.5 or 3.0 will 
begin be mature enough, and powerful enough for demanding systems to rely on 
Jackrabbit.

 

Thanks anyway for all your good and detailed answers ;-)

 

Frederic Esnault

Reply via email to