Hi Oliver,
Thanks for your interest in JCMS. We (the JCMS team) plan to start this kind of
discussion on Slide & JackRabbit mailing lists but Incubator is certainly the right
place to do that.
The main JCMS goals are :
1.Group together different kind of content servers in order to aggrate th
hi oli,
thanks for your comments. i really appreciate your interest.
> first of all let me say that I really appreciate your help! Second,
> let me say that I have no reservations concerning Jackrabbit and
> certainly do not see it as a threat to Slide or the other way round
> (which others seeme
Hi David,
first of all let me say that I really appreciate your help! Second,
let me say that I have no reservations concerning Jackrabbit and
certainly do not see it as a threat to Slide or the other way round
(which others seemed to feel in other posts), but rather want to
explore where each pro
hi oliver,
> (1) Where can I get the (tentative) JCR API?
you can download the snapshot that was out for public review
in may-2004
( http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/review/jsr170/index.html )
which is a quite a bit outdated now. or you can get the binaries that
are used by maven to buil
Two (maybe dumb) questions
(1) Where can I get the (tentative) JCR API?
(2) When *presumably* will Jackrabbit be mature enought to be an
alternative to the current Slide backend?
Oliver
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 17:41:49 -0800, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is no problem. There i
There is no problem. There is no reason at all for any one project
to "own" the CMS space at Apache. It makes sense for Slide to replace
its back-end with Jackrabbit for one and only one reason: such an
architecture will enable substitutability of its back-end and simplify
Slide's implementation.
"Rolf Kulemann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> But JCMS also claims to support/use standards like JCR. AFAICS Slide
> does not support JCR. I do not know why, but I saw some posting giving
> me the feeling it was due to lack of collaboration between the former
> jcrri team and the Slide team.
I
On Sun, 2004-10-31 at 14:31, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
> > Mhh, a standard query API? WebDAV only specifies a query envelope, but
> > not the query language. Or do you mean the Slide API exposes a standard
> > query API? Which standard does it use?
>
> There is more than an envelope, there also is
> Mhh, a standard query API? WebDAV only specifies a query envelope, but
> not the query language. Or do you mean the Slide API exposes a standard
> query API? Which standard does it use?
There is more than an envelope, there also is the basic search:
http://www.greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-re
On Sun, 2004-10-31 at 13:14, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
> > Ok, sorry, I missed the WebDAV thingy. You are right. BUT WebDAV is very
> > limited; see transactions and a standard query API. However, this is
> > another discussion.
> >
> > This is exactly the reason why I won't use Slide for Lenya; I
On Sun, 2004-10-31 at 13:14, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
> > Ok, sorry, I missed the WebDAV thingy. You are right. BUT WebDAV is very
> > limited; see transactions and a standard query API. However, this is
> > another discussion.
> >
> > This is exactly the reason why I won't use Slide for Lenya; I
On Sun, 2004-10-31 at 13:14, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
...
> > To be honest again, my personal wish is that Slide and Rabbit folks
> > would work more closely together. I feel the potential of
> > cross-pollination is great.
>
> By the way, I was not able to follow the progress of the Rabbit
> thi
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 13:00:23 +0100, Rolf Kulemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-10-31 at 12:46, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
> > Hi Rolf,
> >
> > thanks for this honest statement. I was just wondering a little bit:
> > Slide's main focus is on providing a WebDAV compliant server for all
> >
> Ok, sorry, I missed the WebDAV thingy. You are right. BUT WebDAV is very
> limited; see transactions and a standard query API. However, this is
> another discussion.
>
> This is exactly the reason why I won't use Slide for Lenya; I can not
> use WebDAV because of its limitations and I do not wan
On Sun, 2004-10-31 at 12:46, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
> Hi Rolf,
>
> thanks for this honest statement. I was just wondering a little bit:
> Slide's main focus is on providing a WebDAV compliant server for all
> kinds of repositories. I guess it does this job pretty well. It
> becomes easier and ea
On Sun, 2004-10-31 at 12:46, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
> Hi Rolf,
>
> thanks for this honest statement. I was just wondering a little bit:
> Slide's main focus is on providing a WebDAV compliant server for all
> kinds of repositories. I guess it does this job pretty well. It
> becomes easier and ea
Hi Rolf,
thanks for this honest statement. I was just wondering a little bit:
Slide's main focus is on providing a WebDAV compliant server for all
kinds of repositories. I guess it does this job pretty well. It
becomes easier and easier to plug all kinds of stores into it and the
WebDAV compliance
On Sun, 2004-10-31 at 00:03, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
> Folks,
>
> just heard of JCMS proposed to be incubated and it sounds interesting.
> Looking at the description and the sources I wonder why not helping
> the Slide project to achive the goals stated in the proposal. Goals
> are pretty similar
18 matches
Mail list logo
