Mailing-List: contact oak-dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <4F704993.7070808@apache.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:48:51 +0100
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Michael_D=FCrig?= <mduerig@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6;
 rv:11.0) Gecko/20120313 Thunderbird/11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Subject: Re: Values in oak-core
References: <4F6CC594.9090205@apache.org>
 <CAOFYJNaRt-SiaksJKh=6BQXy-AoLprA6iDRd=GpNj_C8=ZUdRg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F6E55DE.3090606@apache.org>
 <CAOFYJNZAPa-=rGKN4wMjHr789sKFkQAyekC8_8LQVp5wqFVSvA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOFYJNZAPa-=rGKN4wMjHr789sKFkQAyekC8_8LQVp5wqFVSvA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


On 26.3.12 11:18, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Michael D�rig<mduerig@apache.org>  wrote:
>> That's actually the way I look at it. However moving Scalar to oak-mk would
>> require us to have a dependency from oak-jcr to oak-mk which I think we
>> shouldn't.
>
> See why I would have like to keep oak-core and -mk in the same
> component until we figure out where the ideal component boundary lies?
> :-)

Hehe ;-)

> For now I'd say we move Scalar to oak-mk to be a part of the internal
> tree model there, and use it also in oak-core and ultimately oak-jcr
> through the .oak.kernel package. Once the design is finished, we can
> make a clearer separation between the components.

Ok, I did the respective changes in revision 1305295, 1305296 and 
1305303. Note that I left some todo's in SimplePropertyState. I can take 
care of these but it'll take me until tomorrow.

Michael

>
>> But let's not get caught up with this. I can live with Scalar being an
>> interface.
>
> OK. We can revisit this later on as the implementation stabilizes.
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting