incubator-graffito-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sandro Böhme <>
Subject Re: JCR integration proposal
Date Tue, 29 Mar 2005 12:51:56 GMT
Hi Oliver,

from all I know only defining, creating and managing of node types is 
not part of the specification. So you are right, registering of 
nodetypes in the repository is specific for every repository. But once I 
have the nodetypes - reading, introspection and writing should be 
similar in every repository implementation. Nobody should need to change 
the code for the runtime classes of an application if the implementation 
of the JCR was changed. Only the registration of the nodetypes at design 
time would be different. Or do I miss something here?

 > I think that a JDO approach is beyond the scope and capabilities of
 > JCR and was not meant for it.
Of course it is beyond the scope. But I think it would be useful in a 
real live application anyway.



Oliver Kiessler wrote:
> hi sandro,
>>Would that mean, you will have a nodetype for each class? How do you
>>plan to organize the JCR-nodes?
> Definition and configuration of nodetypes is up to the jcr
> implementation. It might be implemented by jackrabbit but not by
> others. This might leave you with a repository that is unusable with
> other cms/jcr implementations. Jcr's main benefit was to create a
> common (shared and compatible) infrastructure for content management
> systems, with this approach you will probably loose it.
> Let's not forget that node type configuration and management is up to
> the jcr repository implementation, not necessarily to the jcr capable
> repository client implementation.
>>What's your opinion on that? Are you interested in a general, JDO
>>supporting solution or do you need an immediate Graffito specific
>>solution? As I don't want to slow down your work with a general solution
>>I can work parallel on a JDO and node type based solution and later
>>contribute it if you need it.
>>Whats your opinion on that?
> I think that a JDO approach is beyond the scope and capabilities of
> JCR and was not meant for it. But I might be wrong... ;)
> regards,
> oliver

View raw message