Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of uncled@day.com designates
 62.192.10.254 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <1b0d43d00802080803r171d88ceqa65ca115fa1af9a0@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 17:03:54 +0100
From: "David Nuescheler" <david@day.com>
Sender: uncled@day.com
To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Subject: Re: Same name siblings
In-Reply-To: <47AC7C94.1040200@gmx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <510143ac0802080723h26cc609ekc1825f9172773231@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1b0d43d00802080748n7afb452dt143e5dd41ff474f1@mail.gmail.com>
	 <47AC7C94.1040200@gmx.de>

> > On the other hand I would really like to give people a means to
> > work with large anonymous unordered collections.
> > I think a feature that would address the "I have a bag of objects
> > and I just want to persist them without thinking of a 'name' for
> > each" usecase, would definitely be great. Maybe this could
> > be the introduction of an addNode() without a childnode name.
> A big +1 on that idea.
>
> "Store this and return me a path" would be really useful. Would it make
> sense to allow the impl to choose the container as well?
interesting twist, would that be a Session.addNode() vs. a Node.addNode()
without a node name?

regards,
david