sling-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason E Bailey <>
Subject Re: [RT] Simple File System Resource Provider
Date Mon, 12 Nov 2018 14:13:52 GMT
+1 on a simple resource provider, I'm curious about the focus on a filesystem provider. I've
started playing around with creating one and I see a clear logical association between what
a resource provider needs and a key-value store. Good key-value stores already have versioning,
and non blocking read and writes. Things that are architecturally nice to have removed from
our hands.

Something like mvstore -
or lmdb  -

would be really good to build on.

- Jason

On Sun, Nov 11, 2018, at 4:55 AM, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> I've recently tried to run a minimal Sling without JCR. Obviously you 
> need at least one resource provider to have some content, so I picked 
> the easiest choice, the file system resource provider.
> However, it turned out that this is not the easiest choice for this 
> scenario as it has a lot of features, especially support for handling 
> content XML files and vault files, which again brings in the whole 
> dependency list to jcr related bundles. In my case I just want to stream 
> binaries and json files, so none of the above is needed. But still I 
> need to deploy all the bundles. In addition there are other things like 
> the json parsing library is embedded in the bundle etc.
> Now, I think we should really have a simple file system resource 
> provider which only does the basics and has not an endless list of 
> bundles. I see two ways to get there: make the current provider 
> extensible and provide all this extra cruft as extensions or write a new 
> simple provider.
> Thoughts?
> Regards
> Carsten
> -- 
> Carsten Ziegeler
> Adobe Research Switzerland

View raw message