jackrabbit-oak-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dominique Pfister <dpfis...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: On setting component boundaries in Oak
Date Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:52:36 GMT
Hi,

On Mar 15, 2012, at 1:57 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Stefan Guggisberg
> <stefan.guggisberg@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Angela Schreiber <anchela@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> The API and protocol bindings on the top are just some examples.
>>> 
>>> ok... because i am not so sure about a plain WebDAV binding.
>>> imo that one would rather belong on top of the JCR binding.
>>> so, i would rather not have listed here as long as we don't
>>> really plan to build that as it might cause confusion.
> 
> OK, let's drop the WebDAV bit for now from the diagram. As I said,
> it's just an example of what we could do.
> 
>>> well... but this means that the mk implementations that are
>>> currently located in the oak-core module should be moved out
>>> to some different component.
>> 
>> agreed, and that's IMO good. we should allow for alternative
>> mk impls (like we did with the jr pm's) but we also should
>> also designate a default impl (sort of a mk api reference impl).
> 
> Yep. I'd like to see that default MK be as simple as possible, ideally
> just an in-memory implementation designed mostly for testing and as a
> reference point for other implementations.

Of course, it's a good idea to have an in-memory implementation for quick testing, but IMO
a default implementation should at least store data in a way that it survives a restart.

Kind regards
Dominique
Mime
View raw message