jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From IvanLatysh <i...@yourmail.com>
Subject Re: Content Object Mapping - jcrom.org
Date Tue, 05 Feb 2008 14:40:26 GMT
Alex Lukin wrote:

> Sounds good again but:
> 1) Current ocm in jackrabbit source tree does not have anything in common with JPA annotation
and/or ideology
> 2) JPA is based on relational approach and does not work properly with tree-like structures
we use often with JCR
> 3) JPA is monstrous as current jackrabbit OCM is.
> 4) Where is effort mentioned above to join? Where is published source to look at?
> I checked jcrom and created nodes in 5 minutes. Current OCM took much much more time
to go trough broken docs, complicated tests and hanging ends... 
> So my opinion is: Simple and quick OCM like jcrom.org is just great solution. 
> If some standard-addicted company wants to implement JPA on top JCR - that's good. 
> If current "official" OCM is more flexible and powerfull - that's good too, but I need
working OCM now and can't wait new implementations and neverending doc fixings.

Just my 2 cents, Jack Rabbit will not provide any advantages for Java Object 
Mapping, on the opposite side, will cause you many problems. As it mentioned 
before JR works with tree structures and not collections.

If you want working JOM, have a look at https://hyperjaxb.dev.java.net that 
actually fit this task.

Ivan Latysh

View raw message