Re: Slide and JSR170

[Oliver Zeigermann <ol...@gmail.com>]

Slide does not support JRS170. Jackrabbit isn't used either. It's the
other way round as well, Jackrabbit does not use Slide either.

I guess there are quite a number of parameters included in the
decision which way to go, so I really can not make any recommendation.

Good thing about WebDAV is that there already are a number of
applications supporting it. Drawback would be that WebDAV by nature is
a client/sever protocol, so you would always have the communication
overhead. On the other hand while JSR170 covers only certain aspects
of a content store, WebDAV is pretty much complete. Additionally,
programming against JSR170 would restrict you to Java solutions.

I *personally* would not at all recommend programming against the
sever Slide API...

Oliver 

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:52:17 -0500, Jeff Broberg <je...@broberg.us> wrote:
> Ok, simple question.  Is the Slide API based on JSR170 ?  If so, is
> JackRabbit used inside Slide ?  We are considering if we should write our
> java clients to use WebDAV client protocols or use the Slide API, or if
> possible the 170 api.
> 
> Any guidance would be appreciated.
> 
> Jeff
> 
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: slide-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: slide-user-help@jakarta.apache.org

Re: Slide and JSR170

[Oliver Zeigermann <ol...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:56:44 -0500, Jeff Broberg <je...@broberg.us> wrote:
> Thanks for the response.  I quess my question is, "What is the overall
> architecture for CMS as far as Apache goes ?"  There seems to be quite a bit
> of duplication, and I am not sure why slide wouldn't use jackrabbit, or 170.

1) Slide was there long before there even was the JSR170 or
Jackrabbit, so it can hardly rely on it
2) You do not actually *use* JSR170 but at most expose it as an API to
the programmer
3) I do not think there is something like a master plan concerning CMS
architecture at Apache

> Just curious, why do you recommend against using the server Slide API.  Is
> it because it is only relevant to slide ?  If so, I agree, because it causes
> technology lockin.  So, if that is the case, what is the benefit of the
> server api at all ?

It is not because it is proprietary. You could easily put something
like an abstraction wrapper around it or use any form of data access
ojects.

The reason is that it is pretty hard and error prone to program to the
Server API. So, do not program to it if you do not have to.

Oliver

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: slide-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: slide-user-help@jakarta.apache.org

RE: Slide and JSR170

[Jeff Broberg <je...@broberg.us>]

Thanks for the response.  I quess my question is, "What is the overall
architecture for CMS as far as Apache goes ?"  There seems to be quite a bit
of duplication, and I am not sure why slide wouldn't use jackrabbit, or 170.
They seem like the logical stack.  I agree with your assessment re: webdav.
It is more global in nature.

Just curious, why do you recommend against using the server Slide API.  Is
it because it is only relevant to slide ?  If so, I agree, because it causes
technology lockin.  So, if that is the case, what is the benefit of the
server api at all ?

Jeff 

-----Original Message-----
From: Oliver Zeigermann [mailto:oliver.zeigermann@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 6:08 PM
To: Slide Users Mailing List; jeff@broberg.us
Subject: Re: Slide and JSR170

Slide does not support JRS170. Jackrabbit isn't used either. It's the other
way round as well, Jackrabbit does not use Slide either.

I guess there are quite a number of parameters included in the decision
which way to go, so I really can not make any recommendation.

Good thing about WebDAV is that there already are a number of applications
supporting it. Drawback would be that WebDAV by nature is a client/sever
protocol, so you would always have the communication overhead. On the other
hand while JSR170 covers only certain aspects of a content store, WebDAV is
pretty much complete. Additionally, programming against JSR170 would
restrict you to Java solutions.

I *personally* would not at all recommend programming against the sever
Slide API...

Oliver 

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:52:17 -0500, Jeff Broberg <je...@broberg.us> wrote:
> Ok, simple question.  Is the Slide API based on JSR170 ?  If so, is 
> JackRabbit used inside Slide ?  We are considering if we should write 
> our java clients to use WebDAV client protocols or use the Slide API, 
> or if possible the 170 api.
> 
> Any guidance would be appreciated.
> 
> Jeff
> 
>



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: slide-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: slide-user-help@jakarta.apache.org