OCM supports annotations and XML mappings. And it supports custom converters for simple types, Beans and collections. The only disagreement I have with the design is the need to carry 'path' as part of the bean that I want to persist.
Btw: I was the one to whom Fabian had suggested the wrapper class approach. Unfortunately I was not able to cheat persistence layer to think that something is persistable only because it came wrapped in a 'Serializable' blanket. So that wrapper solution does not really work with JCROM. : Just FYI Thanks boni -----Original Message----- From: Fabián Mandelbaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 11 November 2008 15:28 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping) Hello Boni, even this answer wasn't directed to me, please let me answer to it. I believe that the best/superior/whatever tool is the one that does the job the way you want it. OCM is the most complete, official, sofisticated, add_more_adjectives_here, JCR OR mapping solution, but JCROM looks far simpler and is based on annotations, which is a great thing for people coming from other OR mapping solutions (like Hibernate) because it makes things more "familiar", which is always a big plus for development. Boni Gopalan (BioImagene) escribió: > Fabain : Runtime every generic will be an Object and ONLY of type > java.lang.Object. It is not a problem with jackrabbit-ocm but a result of > the way generics is implemented in Java. However you will be able to map out > the object exactly the say you want to map it our by using the right > converter (Bean Converter or Collection Converter) available with > jackrabbit-ocm. If none is fitting your requirements writing one is very > simple too. Why don't you lay out your exact requirements I will be able to > help you with it. I am in the thick of a jackrabbit-ocm based persistent > storage implementation and I am effextively using a generic dao > (AbstractDao<T>) just like the one JCROM has. There is absolutely any doubt > that jackrabbit-ocm is superior to any JCR OR mapping tools available > currently. > > Thanks > boni > > -----Original Message----- > From: Fard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 10 November 2008 21:18 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping) > > > Hello Fabián, > > Your example is a good example. It is exactly one of my problems. > the other things in JACROM I could not define a filed with java.lang.Object > type in my class. Beacause I would like to assign an object/s of any type > (for example String, File,...) during run time to it. > I have also used native Jackrabbit OCM and I couldn't solve my problem with > it. > So I'm looking for anather OCM for transaction with Jackrabbit. > > Regards > > Fard > > > Fabián Mandelbaum wrote: > >> Fard escribió: >> >>> Hello there, >>> >>> I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have used >>> JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good >>> remedy >>> for java generic programming. >>> >>> I really really appreciate any help. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Fard >>> >>> >> Hello Fard, >> >> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like: >> >> public class SomeDAO<T> >> >> for example? >> >> >> > >
