You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org by Angela Schreiber <an...@adobe.com> on 2015/03/26 15:20:02 UTC
[VOTE] retire oak-mk-remote into attic
Dear Oak Team
During initial phase of building a new JCR content repository (OAK),
we added an remoting layer for the original persistence layer (called
MicroKernel) which since then has been part of the Oak project.
In the mean time the overall architecture and design has evolved and
matured and we ended up having all consistency checks, validation and
security located in the oak-core layer on top of the persistence s.str.
At the same time we replace the original MicroKernel persistence API
by the NodeStore API.
Similarly we came up with a whole bunch of low-level inspections and
repair tools in the oak-run module, while at the same time there was
little active maintenance/development in the oak-mk-remote module.
Given these developments in our code base, I came to believe that we no
longer need the MK remoting i.e. the ability to directly interact with
the persistence layer using HTTP bypassing all validation that assures
the stability, consistency and security of the repository.
I would therefore like to suggest to retire the oak-mk-remote module
(e.g. moving it to attic) and removing it of the main oak pom.xml. The
corresponding JIRA component description should only be adjusted to
reflect this but will continue to exist.
So, please case your vote for this proposal.
In case of objection I kindly ask you for some technical description on
why we need to keep oak-mk-remote in the productive oak project and
perform regular releases and how we can address the concerns expressed
above.
Thanks and kind regards
Angela
Re: [VOTE] retire oak-mk-remote into attic
Posted by Davide Giannella <da...@apache.org>.
On 26/03/2015 14:20, Angela Schreiber wrote:
> ...
> I would therefore like to suggest to retire the oak-mk-remote module
> (e.g. moving it to attic) and removing it of the main oak pom.xml. The
> corresponding JIRA component description should only be adjusted to
> reflect this but will continue to exist.
> ....
+1
-- Davide
Re: [VOTE] retire oak-mk-remote into attic
Posted by Marcel Reutegger <mr...@adobe.com>.
+1
Regards
Marcel
On 26/03/15 15:20, "Angela Schreiber" <an...@adobe.com> wrote:
>Dear Oak Team
>
>During initial phase of building a new JCR content repository (OAK),
>we added an remoting layer for the original persistence layer (called
>MicroKernel) which since then has been part of the Oak project.
>
>In the mean time the overall architecture and design has evolved and
>matured and we ended up having all consistency checks, validation and
>security located in the oak-core layer on top of the persistence s.str.
>At the same time we replace the original MicroKernel persistence API
>by the NodeStore API.
>
>Similarly we came up with a whole bunch of low-level inspections and
>repair tools in the oak-run module, while at the same time there was
>little active maintenance/development in the oak-mk-remote module.
>
>Given these developments in our code base, I came to believe that we no
>longer need the MK remoting i.e. the ability to directly interact with
>the persistence layer using HTTP bypassing all validation that assures
>the stability, consistency and security of the repository.
>
>I would therefore like to suggest to retire the oak-mk-remote module
>(e.g. moving it to attic) and removing it of the main oak pom.xml. The
>corresponding JIRA component description should only be adjusted to
>reflect this but will continue to exist.
>
>So, please case your vote for this proposal.
>In case of objection I kindly ask you for some technical description on
>why we need to keep oak-mk-remote in the productive oak project and
>perform regular releases and how we can address the concerns expressed
>above.
>
>Thanks and kind regards
>Angela
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] retire oak-mk-remote into attic
Posted by Michael Dürig <md...@apache.org>.
+1
Michael
On 26.3.15 3:20 , Angela Schreiber wrote:
> Dear Oak Team
>
> During initial phase of building a new JCR content repository (OAK),
> we added an remoting layer for the original persistence layer (called
> MicroKernel) which since then has been part of the Oak project.
>
> In the mean time the overall architecture and design has evolved and
> matured and we ended up having all consistency checks, validation and
> security located in the oak-core layer on top of the persistence s.str.
> At the same time we replace the original MicroKernel persistence API
> by the NodeStore API.
>
> Similarly we came up with a whole bunch of low-level inspections and
> repair tools in the oak-run module, while at the same time there was
> little active maintenance/development in the oak-mk-remote module.
>
> Given these developments in our code base, I came to believe that we no
> longer need the MK remoting i.e. the ability to directly interact with
> the persistence layer using HTTP bypassing all validation that assures
> the stability, consistency and security of the repository.
>
> I would therefore like to suggest to retire the oak-mk-remote module
> (e.g. moving it to attic) and removing it of the main oak pom.xml. The
> corresponding JIRA component description should only be adjusted to
> reflect this but will continue to exist.
>
> So, please case your vote for this proposal.
> In case of objection I kindly ask you for some technical description on
> why we need to keep oak-mk-remote in the productive oak project and
> perform regular releases and how we can address the concerns expressed
> above.
>
> Thanks and kind regards
> Angela
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] retire oak-mk-remote into attic
Posted by Thomas Mueller <mu...@adobe.com>.
+1
On 26/03/15 15:20, "Angela Schreiber" <an...@adobe.com> wrote:
>Dear Oak Team
>
>During initial phase of building a new JCR content repository (OAK),
>we added an remoting layer for the original persistence layer (called
>MicroKernel) which since then has been part of the Oak project.
>
>In the mean time the overall architecture and design has evolved and
>matured and we ended up having all consistency checks, validation and
>security located in the oak-core layer on top of the persistence s.str.
>At the same time we replace the original MicroKernel persistence API
>by the NodeStore API.
>
>Similarly we came up with a whole bunch of low-level inspections and
>repair tools in the oak-run module, while at the same time there was
>little active maintenance/development in the oak-mk-remote module.
>
>Given these developments in our code base, I came to believe that we no
>longer need the MK remoting i.e. the ability to directly interact with
>the persistence layer using HTTP bypassing all validation that assures
>the stability, consistency and security of the repository.
>
>I would therefore like to suggest to retire the oak-mk-remote module
>(e.g. moving it to attic) and removing it of the main oak pom.xml. The
>corresponding JIRA component description should only be adjusted to
>reflect this but will continue to exist.
>
>So, please case your vote for this proposal.
>In case of objection I kindly ask you for some technical description on
>why we need to keep oak-mk-remote in the productive oak project and
>perform regular releases and how we can address the concerns expressed
>above.
>
>Thanks and kind regards
>Angela
>
>
>