jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tobias Bocanegra <tobias.bocane...@day.com>
Subject Re: Analyzing the Jackrabbit architecture
Date Mon, 09 Jan 2006 12:05:45 GMT
that looks cool. thanks for taking the time. some comments to your suggestions:

- Split the main core package into subpackages
that certainly makes sense, but by what semantics?

- Move the nodetype.virtual package to a higher level
we could put those into the oaj.core.virtual package. btw: there are
plans to remove the virtual states completely and add a more
sophisticated approach.

- Move the state subpackages to a separate package
as far as i can tell, most of the state subpackages are implementation
of persistencemanagers. so i suggest to create a
oaj.core.persistencemgr package.

- Make a separate package for the item state managers
that would be: oaj.core.statemgr  ?

- Move the NodeId, PropertyId, and ItemId classes to the state package
totally makes sense.

regards, toby


--
-----------------------------------------< tobias.bocanegra@day.com >---
Tobias Bocanegra, Day Management AG, Barfuesserplatz 6, CH - 4001 Basel
T +41 61 226 98 98, F +41 61 226 98 97
-----------------------------------------------< http://www.day.com >---

Mime
View raw message