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 2014/02/20 17:43:20 UTC

[jira] [Updated] (OAK-1013) Node.addNode(name) different behavior from JR if NodeType resolves to an abstract

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-1013?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Michael Dürig updated OAK-1013:
-------------------------------

    Issue Type: Improvement  (was: Bug)

> Node.addNode(name) different behavior from JR if NodeType resolves to an abstract
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OAK-1013
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-1013
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: jcr
>    Affects Versions: 0.8
>            Reporter: Christan Keller
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: Issue.java
>
>
> In Jackrabbit, if you used node.addNode(name) and the NodeType resolved to an abstract like nt:base Jackrabbit still persisted the new Node.
> In Oak a ConstraintViolationException is thrown.
> While the Oak behavior is fully Spec complient, it still may be a migration issue for JR users.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.5#6160)