lenya-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rolf Kulemann <m...@rolf-kulemann.com>
Subject State of a repository interface/concept ?
Date Wed, 31 Dec 2003 13:30:17 GMT
Hello developers,

I listened curious to the discussions about a repository concept in
lenya/cocoon. The main discussion thread can be seen here:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=107022316500003&r=1&w=2

Are there any new ideas or infos out there? 
For which Lenya release a repository is planned ?

(Bored people can stop reading here)

To summarize a bit:

- Regarding doco, a webdav content repository should be integrated
- We have thought about some basic requirements for a content
repository, which are all met by webdav in general, imho
- The apache software stack contains a project named Silde, which claims
to be a webdav compatible cms framework, hoho.
- Cocoon contains some blocks trying to provide a kind of repository
interface. One uses slide rudimentary.
- As Stefano already mentioned they differ in concepts and are imho not
quite useful from lenya's point of view.


I have played around with slide and had some quick looks into
appropriate cocoon blocks like slide, repository and linotype. As far as
I could follow Stefano's arguments, I completely agree with the issues
he made on the existing repository approaches (see the thread above).

Afaik, slide's webdav client will support the versioning extension in
version 2. The version 2 of slide  is planned for march or so.

I wonder if someone has more details about a new repository interface in
cocoon and how the interaction with the sitemap should work.

I thought of a first implementation of using slide through slide's
webdav client. Thats how the slide block does it. The question is, how
should the interface on cocoon side look(linotype stuff is quite
structured concerning this could be a basis) and which infrastructure
should be used in sitemaps to save, version and retrieve docs from the
repository. The slide block uses actions, which is not that bad.

Afaik, the idea of implementing workflow stuff using metadata attached
to a document revision is possible with webdav.

Stefano mentioned, to implement moving of docs via metadata. After
having a look to slide and its webdav client api I don't like the idea
anymore. The reason why this would be useful is, one could use the url
or path as a unique id for a webdav resource, but I think, the
repository impl(slide) should provide a kind of unique hashcode for each
resource independent of the url or location. So one could resolve the id
to an url or vice versa. Otherwise we need to take care of all the
moving and metadata maintenance. 
What do you think? 

Another problem is, that slide and a lot more repositories will have
their own access control implementation. How should this be integrated?
A mapping to Lenya's ac system? Or should Lenya's ac system be dropped
in order to use the repository's ac system?

It will be quite some work to implement all needed things. 


I wish you all of you a happy new year.

-- 

Regards,

Rolf Kulemann

Always remember: 
	"There is inherently no silver bullet." - F.Brooks

PGP/GPG public key:
	http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x6B4EA7EA	


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lenya-dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lenya-dev-help@cocoon.apache.org


Mime
View raw message