You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to oak-issues@jackrabbit.apache.org by "Michael Dürig (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2013/11/20 20:34:35 UTC
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-1206) Consider renaming internal nodetypes
and item names
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-1206?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13828022#comment-13828022 ]
Michael Dürig commented on OAK-1206:
------------------------------------
In general I'm fine with this but we should get to an agreement on OAK-74 first. See Julian's [last comment | https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-74?focusedCommentId=13624793&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13624793] for why this is a problem.
> Consider renaming internal nodetypes and item names
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-1206
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-1206
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Tobias Bocanegra
>
> some new nodetypes have the oak namespace but are used only internally. in jackrabbit 2.x we used the 'internal' namespace for those.
> I suggest to use the internal namespace for nodes that are not (or should not) be created via JCR, namely:
> * rep:NodeType
> * rep:NamedPropertyDefinitions
> * rep:PropertyDefinitions
> * rep:PropertyDefinition
> * rep:NamedChildNodeDefinitions
> * rep:ChildNodeDefinitions
> * rep:ChildNodeDefinition
> see also OAK-1180
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)