jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Boni Gopalan \(BioImagene\)" <Bon...@bioimagene.com>
Subject RE: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Date Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:25:41 GMT
Christophe: I feel it is high time to update the documentation (Tutorial) may be on a war footing
:-) .  I will put in whatever time I could spare to write tutorial content.  Any other volunteers?

-----Original Message-----
From: Christophe Lombart [mailto:christophe.lombart@gmail.com] 
Sent: 11 November 2008 16:43
To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)

OCM provides annotation support and version 1.5 is simpler than version 1.4.

Anyway, let us know what is the complexity in OCM. We can work on it. It is
always positive to receive comments on the work done.

thanks,
Christophe



On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 10:58, Fabián Mandelbaum <fmandelbaum@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hello Boni,
>
>    even this answer wasn't directed to me, please let me answer to it.
>
>    I believe that the best/superior/whatever tool is the one that does
> the job the way you want it.
>
>    OCM is the most complete, official, sofisticated,
> add_more_adjectives_here, JCR OR mapping solution, but JCROM looks far
> simpler and is based on annotations, which is a great thing for people
> coming from other OR mapping solutions (like Hibernate) because it makes
> things more "familiar", which is always a big plus for development.
>
> Boni Gopalan (BioImagene) escribió:
> > Fabain : Runtime every generic will be an Object and ONLY of type
> java.lang.Object.  It is not a problem with jackrabbit-ocm but a result of
> the way generics is implemented in Java.  However you will be able to map
> out the object exactly the say you want to map it our by using the right
> converter (Bean Converter or Collection Converter) available with
> jackrabbit-ocm.  If none is fitting your requirements writing one is very
> simple too.  Why don't you lay out your exact requirements I will be able to
> help you with it.  I am in the thick of a jackrabbit-ocm based persistent
> storage implementation and I am effextively using a generic dao
> (AbstractDao<T>) just like the one JCROM has.  There is absolutely any doubt
> that jackrabbit-ocm is superior to any JCR OR mapping tools available
> currently.
> >
> > Thanks
> > boni
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Fard [mailto:maurice.fard@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 10 November 2008 21:18
> > To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
> >
> >
> > Hello Fabián,
> >
> > Your example is a good example. It is exactly one of my problems.
> > the other things in JACROM I could not define a filed with
> java.lang.Object
> > type in my class. Beacause I would like to assign an object/s of any type
> > (for example String, File,...) during run time to it.
> > I have also used native Jackrabbit OCM and I couldn't solve my problem
> with
> > it.
> > So I'm looking for anather OCM for transaction with Jackrabbit.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Fard
> >
> >
> > Fabián Mandelbaum wrote:
> >
> >> Fard escribió:
> >>
> >>> Hello there,
> >>>
> >>> I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have
> used
> >>> JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good
> >>> remedy
> >>> for java generic programming.
> >>>
> >>> I really really appreciate any help.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>>
> >>> Fard
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Hello Fard,
> >>
> >>     what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
> >>
> >>     public class SomeDAO<T>
> >>
> >>     for example?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

Mime
View raw message