Discussions

News: Content Repository 2.0 spec in Early Review

  1. Content Repository 2.0 spec in Early Review (11 messages)

    Last week, the Content Repository for Java Technology 2.0 (JSR 283) had its early draft review released. Most changes seem centered on clarification of how XPath works within JCR, as well as some clarification on references. JCR 1.0 now has a number of implementations: Jackrabbit, CRX (from Day Software, the sponsors of the spec), Alfresco, Magnolia, and a number of other projects all comply with JSR-170. What have your experiences been with the topic of content management, and with JCR in particular? What do you expect to see out of JCR 2.0?

    Threaded Messages (11)

  2. Actually, a lot of discussion has gone into much more than that in the JSR-283 committee. A full list of issues can be found here. Quite a bit of discussion has gone into security, both extending and simplifying security, linking nodes into multiple paths (important for unclassified or multiple classification content), content life cycles, remote addressing and workspace semantics. All the major vendors have been active and supportive in these discussions. I believe there is a consensus in the group to move toward simplifying the model and aligning the spec to make it easier for the existing repository vendors to implement JCR. With the addition of security and richer expressions in XPath queries, it should be easier to build the types of applications that developers are currently developing against proprietary APIs. It is only an early draft, but it is a good start.
  3. Magnolia[ Go to top ]

    AFAIK Magnolia is built on a Jackrabbit core, just as a few other CMS systems not listed here.
  4. Re: Magnolia[ Go to top ]

    AFAIK Magnolia is built on a Jackrabbit core, just as a few other CMS systems not listed here.
    Correct, I don't believe Magnolia has their own impl. The only other one I know of, atm, is exoplatform. STAY METAL! Roy Russo
  5. Re: Magnolia[ Go to top ]

    Looks like we posted at the same time Roy :) Sorry for copying you so ;)
  6. JCR implementations[ Go to top ]

    Actually there are only 4 JSR 170 implementations available out there (3 OpenSource, 1 commercial): - Jackrabbit (the Reference Implementation) - eXo JCR - Alfresco - CRX (the commercial one but in fact based on jackrabbit) All the other products use one of those implementation. Other implementation should come from big vendors in the future (close?)
  7. Re: JCR implementations[ Go to top ]

    Actually there are only 4 JSR 170 implementations available ... All the other products use one of those implementation.
    Now the prize question is, how well can you exchange repository implementations underneath the products? Can Magnolia run on Exo? That's the actual promise of JCR if I'm not mistaken.
  8. Re: JCR implementations[ Go to top ]

    Now the prize question is, how well can you exchange repository implementations underneath the products? Can Magnolia run on Exo? That's the actual promise of JCR if I'm not mistaken.
    Depends on the CMS vendor and how he chose to utilize the implementation. Such is the case with most implementations. ;-)
  9. Hi all, I wanted to become member of that JCR 2 commite as I was implementing JCR 170, SUN didn't let me join JCP because I am iranian. so I have abondoned the project and completly switched to .Net. hope they change theire policy some day.
  10. One feature which may be useful is automatic conversion between java objects and JCR nodes.
  11. anotations similar to ejb3 entity[ Go to top ]

    if they use annotation for mapping to java objects it would be great to use same set of annotations as ejb3 entity.
  12. if one node has say 1000,000 nodes the JCR tree will become very slow for all implementations I had tested. some restrictions in standard leads to this low performance. I suggest this to be solved so users can store large amount of structure data in repository beside and linked to their unstructured data