Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Subject: Re: No way to implemente an AccessManager?
From: Paco Avila <pavila@git.es>
To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <510143ac0608010317u6490289fsd555ef8f934289f8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1154415152.8896.6.camel@monkiki>
	 <8be731880608010220td4c5471ufa163f62be90867a@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1154426191.18868.1.camel@monkiki>
	 <510143ac0608010317u6490289fsd555ef8f934289f8@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 13:34:19 +0200
Message-Id: <1154432059.24529.2.camel@monkiki>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

El mar, 01-08-2006 a las 13:17 +0300, Jukka Zitting escribió:
> Hi,
> 
> On 8/1/06, Paco Avila <pavila@git.es> wrote:
> > And now which possibilites do I have? Is possible to implement an custom
> > AccessManager actually?
> 
> I suppose your problem is caused by Jackrabbit asking for permissions
> on a node that hasn't yet been persisted, so you can't access it from
> your AccessManager. I'm not sure how this is best handled, but one
> workaround could be to just grant all permissions on such nodes. After
> all the transient nodes are still completely controlled by that
> session.
> 

Thanks, I was thinking in this workaround and I was not sure it was a
good idea. I will try it and check for possible problems.

Thanks again :)
-- 
Paco Avila <pavila@git.es>