jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan D. Cabrera" <l...@toolazydogs.com>
Subject Re: Tight coupling to XML configurations
Date Tue, 28 Aug 2007 16:16:37 GMT

On Aug 27, 2007, at 11:16 PM, Thomas Mueller wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Yes, in my view, repository.xml and workspace.xml should go away or at
> least be less visible for a user. Or do you mean something else with
> XML configuration?

I don't see why we would want to make configuration files less  
visible to the users but that's for a different thread.

Currently, the way the JCR server is booted up is tightly integrated  
w/ XML.  For example, the repository configuration object holds an  
XML snippet that it uses as a template to generate new workspaces.   
This is what I mean by tight coupling.

Ideally, we would have factories.  This gives me more control.

>> interceptor stacks
>
> Could you provide an example?

The current architecture of Jackrabbit seems to be tightly coupled  
with extensions being implemented via inheritance and overriding  
certain methods.  ATM, when I want to provide virtual properties to a  
node, I have to inherit from an existing persistent manager (PM) and  
override methods such as load(PropertyId).

I was thinking that a JCR is really like a CMP container.  Having  
worked on OpenEJB the use of interceptors immediately springs to  
mind.  We can provide all sorts of cross cutting behavior, e.g.  
security, remoting, tx, by just inserting new interceptors.

Take my comments with a grain of salt; I don't fully grok the  
architecture.


Regards,
Alan


Mime
View raw message