jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexandru Popescu ☀" <the.mindstorm.mailingl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Isolation level inconsistency.
Date Fri, 20 Jul 2007 08:18:20 GMT
On 7/20/07, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hendrik Beck (camunda) wrote:
> > One more thing I want to say:
> >
> > "again you're proposing a major change to JCR."
> >
> > "Maybe it's just me, but I have no idea how that could be implemented
> > efficiently, *in
> > particular* if you don't have the luxury to develop that functionality from
> > scratch."
> >
> >
> > 1) In my eyes the public review is there to give any feedback, to discuss
> > everything and to make proposals, whether they are major changes or just
> > little remarks.
> That's right. The point I was trying to make (and apparently failed) was
> that this is a major change to *JCR 1.0*.
> > 2) I wouldn't agree that discussions about implementation details should be
> > part of a public review of a specification. Sure we should keep an eye on
> > the implementation, it has to be done at some point. But, we talk about JCR,
> > not Jackrabbit. The JCR specification shouldn't take care about
> > implementation details of one product (Jackrabbit), but it should find the
> > best way to make the specification according to people's needs and
> > requirements.
> Actually, I wasn't talking about Jackrabbit either.
> If JCR 2.0 adds requirements that are unlikely to be implemented, that's
> IMHO a problem. Either you'll end up with no implementations, or with
> broken implementations (with respect to that feature).
> Best regards, Julian

I agree with both you comments here. However, I do feel that the OP
may be right (I confess that I was not facing this situation so far,
but this is probably because my app is a bit different).

I would really appreciate if somebody would post on this thread a
scenario in which the current behavior is proving helpful (and I have
in mind the scenario posted here: searching for a John and getting a
Joe instead -- frankly speaking I would be totally surprised in real
life if I would be looking for my wife and getting somebody else
instead :-) ).


.w( the_mindstorm )p.

View raw message