Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 14945 invoked from network); 18 Feb 2010 10:50:59 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Feb 2010 10:50:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 87763 invoked by uid 500); 18 Feb 2010 10:50:59 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-dev-archive@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 87697 invoked by uid 500); 18 Feb 2010 10:50:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 87689 invoked by uid 99); 18 Feb 2010 10:50:58 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Feb 2010 10:50:58 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of stefan.guggisberg@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.228 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.220.228] (HELO mail-fx0-f228.google.com) (209.85.220.228) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Feb 2010 10:50:52 +0000 Received: by fxm28 with SMTP id 28so1938808fxm.11 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2010 02:50:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=S5OwJr4XvMcknVLZx5Dj+mQ9GE095H7Es60nfoOmhO8=; b=QDi7Jpx4/SUauwHXILSTaWJBbdYIk8JWjuJLGPn1WJzVFSCgTGOGYkJ02GsPiLWiPY gsiEF0uSsqVC7bRmP8KoGiBJkwzEOMIEUiKk8XL67gQENMMleq4rm871V/r1J9pS3Gv9 4/V7pxBnmOIKgaLG6LASvKlSOwwJO5qHU4uQ8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=uOgzjOQMsqek0uZkft3fvfe0WqCwH6ENeDquuFriSPh9qI+tfyOCt+jukGpEgHvNTG tJjl3E9xSwBv74/aXDPf+x8WuzSXU9A44/zHhvVuxBqWkua+/M8f0uFV+qa4a01dRo8f y1GBKa6ZVY/C9eP+57GVA/Lo8tv75RunKMDaE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.95.69 with SMTP id c5mr5562802fan.44.1266490230900; Thu, 18 Feb 2010 02:50:30 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <510143ac1002170748lf6e07c0w2d527f4b026dc44@mail.gmail.com> References: <510143ac1002170748lf6e07c0w2d527f4b026dc44@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 11:50:30 +0100 Message-ID: <90a8d1c01002180250h40941e6cjc5d5b17cd67eecb1@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [jr3] Repository microkernel From: Stefan Guggisberg To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote: > Hi, > > Assuming we have a unified persistence layer (see the other thread), > it should be possible to implement a relatively simple repository > "microkernel" that implements just enough functionality for higher > level components like search, versioning, node types, observation, > etc. to be implemented on top of it. > > Such a microkernel would support two main goals: > > * modularity: It would be easy to use things like OSGi to replace or > plug in different higher level components. > > * portability: It would be possible to port the microkernel to other > environments like PHP, Ruby or a plain old Apache module in C +1 > > Achieving this would probably require fairly extensive changes to our > current architecture. > > Do you think this would be worth the effort, and (if yes) how should > we approach this task? absolutely. the SPI would IMO be an ideal starting point for such a microkernel api. we might need to review/strip it though. cheers stefan > > BR, > > Jukka Zitting >