jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Angela Schreiber <anch...@day.com>
Subject Re: Modifying checking in properties.
Date Thu, 02 Jun 2005 12:44:37 GMT

you cannot set a property of a checked-in node.
see jsr170 specification section 8.2.5 Check In:

"The node N and its connected non-versionable subtree become read-only.
Read-only status means that an item cannot be altered by the client 
using standard API methods (addNode, setProperty, etc.). The only 
exceptions to this rule are the restore , Node.merge and Node.update 
operations; [...]".

and section 8.2.6 Check Out:

"In order to alter a versionable node (and its non-versionable subtree) 
the node must be checked-out."

is that, what you were looking for?
kind regards

Peter Morton wrote:
> Hello,
> I would like to set the value of a property of a node that is checked-in,
> without having to check the node out.  (ie so that it is only exists in the
> workspace and not under version control)
> I have set the property OnParentVersionAction.IGNORE for onParentVersion.
> but the code fails due to the following check:
>         // verify that parent node is checked-out
>         if (!parent.internalIsCheckedOut()) {
>             throw new VersionException("cannot set the value of a property
> of a checked-in node "
>                     + safeGetJCRPath());
>         }
> Should I be doing this a different way?
> Peter.
> ________________________________________________________________________________
> This email (and any attachments) is private and confidential, and is intended
> solely for the addressee. If you have received this communication in error
> please remove it and inform us via telephone or email.
> Although we take all possible steps to ensure mail and attachments are free
> from malicious content, malware and viruses, we cannot accept any responsibility
> whatsoever for any changes to content outwith our administrative bounds.
> The views represented within this mail are solely the view of the
> author and do not reflect the views of Graham Technology as a whole.
> ________________________________________________________________________________
> Graham Technology plc                               http://www.gtnet.com
> ________________________________________________________________________________

View raw message