You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@jackrabbit.apache.org by Fard <ma...@gmail.com> on 2008/11/10 07:00:22 UTC
an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Hello there,
I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have used
JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good remedy
for java generic programming.
I really really appreciate any help.
Regards
Fard
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/an-alternative-OCM-%28Object-Content-Mapping%29-tp20414717p20414717.html
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Christophe Lombart <ch...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 16:08, <sl...@excilys.com> wrote:
> >> 3. class registration in annotation mapper. I think global mpper cold
> >> handle this and @Node annoation may put registration code into. I'm
> >> constatntly forgetting to add class there :)
> >
> >
> > Same problem here :-) . I'm still looking for a good way to scan one or
> > more packages to find annoted classes on startup. Do you know how I can
> do
> > it ?
>
> Hi,
>
> The technique I use is inspired by Spring @Component discovery.
>
> You can have a look at
> org.springframework.core.io.support.PathMatchingResourcePatternResolver
> and org.springframework.core.type.classreading.MetadataReader.
>
Thanks I will check it
>
> Hope it helps, even if I know you guys don't want to depend on Spring...
>
> BR,
>
> Stéphane Landelle
>
>
>
Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by sl...@excilys.com.
>> 3. class registration in annotation mapper. I think global mpper cold
>> handle this and @Node annoation may put registration code into. I'm
>> constatntly forgetting to add class there :)
>
>
> Same problem here :-) . I'm still looking for a good way to scan one or
> more packages to find annoted classes on startup. Do you know how I can do
> it ?
Hi,
The technique I use is inspired by Spring @Component discovery.
You can have a look at
org.springframework.core.io.support.PathMatchingResourcePatternResolver
and org.springframework.core.type.classreading.MetadataReader.
Hope it helps, even if I know you guys don't want to depend on Spring...
BR,
Stéphane Landelle
Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Christophe Lombart <ch...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:27, Aleksei Lukin <lu...@stu.cn.ua> wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 November 2008 12:29:46 Boni Gopalan (BioImagene) wrote:
> > OCM supports annotations and XML mappings. And it supports custom
> > converters for simple types, Beans and collections. The only
> disagreement
> > I have with the design is the need to carry 'path' as part of the bean
> that
> > I want to persist.
> [skip]
> >
> > Thanks
> > boni
>
> Well, my 2c about things I do not like in current OCM.
>
You are welcome.
>
> 1. ocm_discriminator node type registration at startup and other messy
> stuff. I could be hidden in some hard-coded static function lile ocmInit().
Agree. From 1.5, this node type is not used. So, it is not necessary to
register it on startup.
>
> 2. path as primary key. I discussed it a lot with author and we are both
> wih our own opinion :) I use path in base class just to satisfy ocm, but for
> real key I use uuid. It is
> fast and it allows to keep reference consistance.
You know my position :-) but it should be nice to see the point of view from
others. For me Path is still a better canditate for an object ID. Maybe we
can try to support both (Path or UUID) as the object id.
>
> 3. class registration in annotation mapper. I think global mpper cold
> handle this and @Node annoation may put registration code into. I'm
> constatntly forgetting to add class
> there :)
Same problem here :-) . I'm still looking for a good way to scan one or more
packages to find annoted classes on startup. Do you know how I can do it ?
>
>
> Thing I miss is Map. But I guess it is under development now.
Map & collection supports are better . Some thing like this :
@Node Class MyClass
{
@Collection List<AnotherClass> mylist;
@Collection Map<String, YetAnotherClass> myMap;
}
This is really simpler compare to the version 1.4. Don't blame me if the
@Collection is not a good name. There is a jira issue to review that. The
JPA annotations OneToMany or OneToOne are better for me.
>
> May be it's time to think on some improvemnent of smart mapping.
Please create jira issues at least to give us some ideas. I would like to
implement a "default" mapping (without annotation and xml description).
>
>
> Rest of annotation based stuff I like, I use, I'm happy with and thank you,
> Christophe! :)
> --
> SY, Alex Lukin
> RIPE NIC HDL: LEXA1-RIPE
>
Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Aleksei Lukin <lu...@stu.cn.ua>.
On Tuesday 11 November 2008 12:29:46 Boni Gopalan (BioImagene) wrote:
> OCM supports annotations and XML mappings. And it supports custom
> converters for simple types, Beans and collections. The only disagreement
> I have with the design is the need to carry 'path' as part of the bean that
> I want to persist.
[skip]
>
> Thanks
> boni
Well, my 2c about things I do not like in current OCM.
1. ocm_discriminator node type registration at startup and other messy stuff. I could be hidden in some hard-coded static function lile ocmInit().
2. path as primary key. I discussed it a lot with author and we are both wih our own opinion :) I use path in base class just to satisfy ocm, but for real key I use uuid. It is
fast and it allows to keep reference consistance.
3. class registration in annotation mapper. I think global mpper cold handle this and @Node annoation may put registration code into. I'm constatntly forgetting to add class
there :) I can think of few mappers to speedup things but it is rare case.
Thing I miss is Map. But I guess it is under development now.
May be it's time to think on some improvemnent of smart mapping.
Rest of annotation based stuff I like, I use, I'm happy with and thank you, Christophe! :)
--
SY, Alex Lukin
RIPE NIC HDL: LEXA1-RIPE
Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Christophe Lombart <ch...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:25, Boni Gopalan (BioImagene) <
Boni.G@bioimagene.com> wrote:
> Christophe: I feel it is high time to update the documentation (Tutorial)
> may be on a war footing :-) . I will put in whatever time I could spare to
> write tutorial content. Any other volunteers?
Thanks Boni
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christophe Lombart [mailto:christophe.lombart@gmail.com]
> Sent: 11 November 2008 16:43
> To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
>
> OCM provides annotation support and version 1.5 is simpler than version
> 1.4.
>
> Anyway, let us know what is the complexity in OCM. We can work on it. It is
> always positive to receive comments on the work done.
>
> thanks,
> Christophe
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 10:58, Fabián Mandelbaum <fmandelbaum@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Hello Boni,
> >
> > even this answer wasn't directed to me, please let me answer to it.
> >
> > I believe that the best/superior/whatever tool is the one that does
> > the job the way you want it.
> >
> > OCM is the most complete, official, sofisticated,
> > add_more_adjectives_here, JCR OR mapping solution, but JCROM looks far
> > simpler and is based on annotations, which is a great thing for people
> > coming from other OR mapping solutions (like Hibernate) because it makes
> > things more "familiar", which is always a big plus for development.
> >
> > Boni Gopalan (BioImagene) escribió:
> > > Fabain : Runtime every generic will be an Object and ONLY of type
> > java.lang.Object. It is not a problem with jackrabbit-ocm but a result
> of
> > the way generics is implemented in Java. However you will be able to map
> > out the object exactly the say you want to map it our by using the right
> > converter (Bean Converter or Collection Converter) available with
> > jackrabbit-ocm. If none is fitting your requirements writing one is very
> > simple too. Why don't you lay out your exact requirements I will be able
> to
> > help you with it. I am in the thick of a jackrabbit-ocm based persistent
> > storage implementation and I am effextively using a generic dao
> > (AbstractDao<T>) just like the one JCROM has. There is absolutely any
> doubt
> > that jackrabbit-ocm is superior to any JCR OR mapping tools available
> > currently.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > boni
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Fard [mailto:maurice.fard@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: 10 November 2008 21:18
> > > To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
> > >
> > >
> > > Hello Fabián,
> > >
> > > Your example is a good example. It is exactly one of my problems.
> > > the other things in JACROM I could not define a filed with
> > java.lang.Object
> > > type in my class. Beacause I would like to assign an object/s of any
> type
> > > (for example String, File,...) during run time to it.
> > > I have also used native Jackrabbit OCM and I couldn't solve my problem
> > with
> > > it.
> > > So I'm looking for anather OCM for transaction with Jackrabbit.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Fard
> > >
> > >
> > > Fabián Mandelbaum wrote:
> > >
> > >> Fard escribió:
> > >>
> > >>> Hello there,
> > >>>
> > >>> I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have
> > used
> > >>> JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good
> > >>> remedy
> > >>> for java generic programming.
> > >>>
> > >>> I really really appreciate any help.
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards
> > >>>
> > >>> Fard
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> Hello Fard,
> > >>
> > >> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
> > >>
> > >> public class SomeDAO<T>
> > >>
> > >> for example?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
RE: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by "Boni Gopalan (BioImagene)" <Bo...@bioimagene.com>.
Christophe: I feel it is high time to update the documentation (Tutorial) may be on a war footing :-) . I will put in whatever time I could spare to write tutorial content. Any other volunteers?
-----Original Message-----
From: Christophe Lombart [mailto:christophe.lombart@gmail.com]
Sent: 11 November 2008 16:43
To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
OCM provides annotation support and version 1.5 is simpler than version 1.4.
Anyway, let us know what is the complexity in OCM. We can work on it. It is
always positive to receive comments on the work done.
thanks,
Christophe
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 10:58, Fabián Mandelbaum <fm...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hello Boni,
>
> even this answer wasn't directed to me, please let me answer to it.
>
> I believe that the best/superior/whatever tool is the one that does
> the job the way you want it.
>
> OCM is the most complete, official, sofisticated,
> add_more_adjectives_here, JCR OR mapping solution, but JCROM looks far
> simpler and is based on annotations, which is a great thing for people
> coming from other OR mapping solutions (like Hibernate) because it makes
> things more "familiar", which is always a big plus for development.
>
> Boni Gopalan (BioImagene) escribió:
> > Fabain : Runtime every generic will be an Object and ONLY of type
> java.lang.Object. It is not a problem with jackrabbit-ocm but a result of
> the way generics is implemented in Java. However you will be able to map
> out the object exactly the say you want to map it our by using the right
> converter (Bean Converter or Collection Converter) available with
> jackrabbit-ocm. If none is fitting your requirements writing one is very
> simple too. Why don't you lay out your exact requirements I will be able to
> help you with it. I am in the thick of a jackrabbit-ocm based persistent
> storage implementation and I am effextively using a generic dao
> (AbstractDao<T>) just like the one JCROM has. There is absolutely any doubt
> that jackrabbit-ocm is superior to any JCR OR mapping tools available
> currently.
> >
> > Thanks
> > boni
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Fard [mailto:maurice.fard@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 10 November 2008 21:18
> > To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
> >
> >
> > Hello Fabián,
> >
> > Your example is a good example. It is exactly one of my problems.
> > the other things in JACROM I could not define a filed with
> java.lang.Object
> > type in my class. Beacause I would like to assign an object/s of any type
> > (for example String, File,...) during run time to it.
> > I have also used native Jackrabbit OCM and I couldn't solve my problem
> with
> > it.
> > So I'm looking for anather OCM for transaction with Jackrabbit.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Fard
> >
> >
> > Fabián Mandelbaum wrote:
> >
> >> Fard escribió:
> >>
> >>> Hello there,
> >>>
> >>> I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have
> used
> >>> JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good
> >>> remedy
> >>> for java generic programming.
> >>>
> >>> I really really appreciate any help.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>>
> >>> Fard
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Hello Fard,
> >>
> >> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
> >>
> >> public class SomeDAO<T>
> >>
> >> for example?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Christophe Lombart <ch...@gmail.com>.
OCM provides annotation support and version 1.5 is simpler than version 1.4.
Anyway, let us know what is the complexity in OCM. We can work on it. It is
always positive to receive comments on the work done.
thanks,
Christophe
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 10:58, Fabián Mandelbaum <fm...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hello Boni,
>
> even this answer wasn't directed to me, please let me answer to it.
>
> I believe that the best/superior/whatever tool is the one that does
> the job the way you want it.
>
> OCM is the most complete, official, sofisticated,
> add_more_adjectives_here, JCR OR mapping solution, but JCROM looks far
> simpler and is based on annotations, which is a great thing for people
> coming from other OR mapping solutions (like Hibernate) because it makes
> things more "familiar", which is always a big plus for development.
>
> Boni Gopalan (BioImagene) escribió:
> > Fabain : Runtime every generic will be an Object and ONLY of type
> java.lang.Object. It is not a problem with jackrabbit-ocm but a result of
> the way generics is implemented in Java. However you will be able to map
> out the object exactly the say you want to map it our by using the right
> converter (Bean Converter or Collection Converter) available with
> jackrabbit-ocm. If none is fitting your requirements writing one is very
> simple too. Why don't you lay out your exact requirements I will be able to
> help you with it. I am in the thick of a jackrabbit-ocm based persistent
> storage implementation and I am effextively using a generic dao
> (AbstractDao<T>) just like the one JCROM has. There is absolutely any doubt
> that jackrabbit-ocm is superior to any JCR OR mapping tools available
> currently.
> >
> > Thanks
> > boni
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Fard [mailto:maurice.fard@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 10 November 2008 21:18
> > To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
> >
> >
> > Hello Fabián,
> >
> > Your example is a good example. It is exactly one of my problems.
> > the other things in JACROM I could not define a filed with
> java.lang.Object
> > type in my class. Beacause I would like to assign an object/s of any type
> > (for example String, File,...) during run time to it.
> > I have also used native Jackrabbit OCM and I couldn't solve my problem
> with
> > it.
> > So I'm looking for anather OCM for transaction with Jackrabbit.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Fard
> >
> >
> > Fabián Mandelbaum wrote:
> >
> >> Fard escribió:
> >>
> >>> Hello there,
> >>>
> >>> I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have
> used
> >>> JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good
> >>> remedy
> >>> for java generic programming.
> >>>
> >>> I really really appreciate any help.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>>
> >>> Fard
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Hello Fard,
> >>
> >> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
> >>
> >> public class SomeDAO<T>
> >>
> >> for example?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Fabián Mandelbaum <fm...@gmail.com>.
Boni,
I apologize, it seems it's been a long time since I don't take a
look at OCM and/or OCM has progressed a lot lately.
I didn't remember it was you I suggested the wrapper approach, sad
to hear it didn't work ;-(
Thanks for your clarifications.
Boni Gopalan (BioImagene) escribió:
> OCM supports annotations and XML mappings. And it supports custom converters for simple types, Beans and collections. The only disagreement I have with the design is the need to carry 'path' as part of the bean that I want to persist.
>
> Btw: I was the one to whom Fabian had suggested the wrapper class approach. Unfortunately I was not able to cheat persistence layer to think that something is persistable only because it came wrapped in a 'Serializable' blanket. So that wrapper solution does not really work with JCROM. : Just FYI
>
> Thanks
> boni
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fabián Mandelbaum [mailto:fmandelbaum@gmail.com]
> Sent: 11 November 2008 15:28
> To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
>
> Hello Boni,
>
> even this answer wasn't directed to me, please let me answer to it.
>
> I believe that the best/superior/whatever tool is the one that does
> the job the way you want it.
>
> OCM is the most complete, official, sofisticated,
> add_more_adjectives_here, JCR OR mapping solution, but JCROM looks far
> simpler and is based on annotations, which is a great thing for people
> coming from other OR mapping solutions (like Hibernate) because it makes
> things more "familiar", which is always a big plus for development.
>
> Boni Gopalan (BioImagene) escribió:
>
>> Fabain : Runtime every generic will be an Object and ONLY of type java.lang.Object. It is not a problem with jackrabbit-ocm but a result of the way generics is implemented in Java. However you will be able to map out the object exactly the say you want to map it our by using the right converter (Bean Converter or Collection Converter) available with jackrabbit-ocm. If none is fitting your requirements writing one is very simple too. Why don't you lay out your exact requirements I will be able to help you with it. I am in the thick of a jackrabbit-ocm based persistent storage implementation and I am effextively using a generic dao (AbstractDao<T>) just like the one JCROM has. There is absolutely any doubt that jackrabbit-ocm is superior to any JCR OR mapping tools available currently.
>>
>> Thanks
>> boni
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Fard [mailto:maurice.fard@gmail.com]
>> Sent: 10 November 2008 21:18
>> To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
>>
>>
>> Hello Fabián,
>>
>> Your example is a good example. It is exactly one of my problems.
>> the other things in JACROM I could not define a filed with java.lang.Object
>> type in my class. Beacause I would like to assign an object/s of any type
>> (for example String, File,...) during run time to it.
>> I have also used native Jackrabbit OCM and I couldn't solve my problem with
>> it.
>> So I'm looking for anather OCM for transaction with Jackrabbit.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Fard
>>
>>
>> Fabián Mandelbaum wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Fard escribió:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hello there,
>>>>
>>>> I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have used
>>>> JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good
>>>> remedy
>>>> for java generic programming.
>>>>
>>>> I really really appreciate any help.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Fard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Hello Fard,
>>>
>>> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
>>>
>>> public class SomeDAO<T>
>>>
>>> for example?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
RE: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by "Boni Gopalan (BioImagene)" <Bo...@bioimagene.com>.
OCM supports annotations and XML mappings. And it supports custom converters for simple types, Beans and collections. The only disagreement I have with the design is the need to carry 'path' as part of the bean that I want to persist.
Btw: I was the one to whom Fabian had suggested the wrapper class approach. Unfortunately I was not able to cheat persistence layer to think that something is persistable only because it came wrapped in a 'Serializable' blanket. So that wrapper solution does not really work with JCROM. : Just FYI
Thanks
boni
-----Original Message-----
From: Fabián Mandelbaum [mailto:fmandelbaum@gmail.com]
Sent: 11 November 2008 15:28
To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Hello Boni,
even this answer wasn't directed to me, please let me answer to it.
I believe that the best/superior/whatever tool is the one that does
the job the way you want it.
OCM is the most complete, official, sofisticated,
add_more_adjectives_here, JCR OR mapping solution, but JCROM looks far
simpler and is based on annotations, which is a great thing for people
coming from other OR mapping solutions (like Hibernate) because it makes
things more "familiar", which is always a big plus for development.
Boni Gopalan (BioImagene) escribió:
> Fabain : Runtime every generic will be an Object and ONLY of type java.lang.Object. It is not a problem with jackrabbit-ocm but a result of the way generics is implemented in Java. However you will be able to map out the object exactly the say you want to map it our by using the right converter (Bean Converter or Collection Converter) available with jackrabbit-ocm. If none is fitting your requirements writing one is very simple too. Why don't you lay out your exact requirements I will be able to help you with it. I am in the thick of a jackrabbit-ocm based persistent storage implementation and I am effextively using a generic dao (AbstractDao<T>) just like the one JCROM has. There is absolutely any doubt that jackrabbit-ocm is superior to any JCR OR mapping tools available currently.
>
> Thanks
> boni
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fard [mailto:maurice.fard@gmail.com]
> Sent: 10 November 2008 21:18
> To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
>
>
> Hello Fabián,
>
> Your example is a good example. It is exactly one of my problems.
> the other things in JACROM I could not define a filed with java.lang.Object
> type in my class. Beacause I would like to assign an object/s of any type
> (for example String, File,...) during run time to it.
> I have also used native Jackrabbit OCM and I couldn't solve my problem with
> it.
> So I'm looking for anather OCM for transaction with Jackrabbit.
>
> Regards
>
> Fard
>
>
> Fabián Mandelbaum wrote:
>
>> Fard escribió:
>>
>>> Hello there,
>>>
>>> I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have used
>>> JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good
>>> remedy
>>> for java generic programming.
>>>
>>> I really really appreciate any help.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Fard
>>>
>>>
>> Hello Fard,
>>
>> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
>>
>> public class SomeDAO<T>
>>
>> for example?
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Fabián Mandelbaum <fm...@gmail.com>.
Hello Boni,
even this answer wasn't directed to me, please let me answer to it.
I believe that the best/superior/whatever tool is the one that does
the job the way you want it.
OCM is the most complete, official, sofisticated,
add_more_adjectives_here, JCR OR mapping solution, but JCROM looks far
simpler and is based on annotations, which is a great thing for people
coming from other OR mapping solutions (like Hibernate) because it makes
things more "familiar", which is always a big plus for development.
Boni Gopalan (BioImagene) escribió:
> Fabain : Runtime every generic will be an Object and ONLY of type java.lang.Object. It is not a problem with jackrabbit-ocm but a result of the way generics is implemented in Java. However you will be able to map out the object exactly the say you want to map it our by using the right converter (Bean Converter or Collection Converter) available with jackrabbit-ocm. If none is fitting your requirements writing one is very simple too. Why don't you lay out your exact requirements I will be able to help you with it. I am in the thick of a jackrabbit-ocm based persistent storage implementation and I am effextively using a generic dao (AbstractDao<T>) just like the one JCROM has. There is absolutely any doubt that jackrabbit-ocm is superior to any JCR OR mapping tools available currently.
>
> Thanks
> boni
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fard [mailto:maurice.fard@gmail.com]
> Sent: 10 November 2008 21:18
> To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
>
>
> Hello Fabián,
>
> Your example is a good example. It is exactly one of my problems.
> the other things in JACROM I could not define a filed with java.lang.Object
> type in my class. Beacause I would like to assign an object/s of any type
> (for example String, File,...) during run time to it.
> I have also used native Jackrabbit OCM and I couldn't solve my problem with
> it.
> So I'm looking for anather OCM for transaction with Jackrabbit.
>
> Regards
>
> Fard
>
>
> Fabián Mandelbaum wrote:
>
>> Fard escribió:
>>
>>> Hello there,
>>>
>>> I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have used
>>> JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good
>>> remedy
>>> for java generic programming.
>>>
>>> I really really appreciate any help.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Fard
>>>
>>>
>> Hello Fard,
>>
>> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
>>
>> public class SomeDAO<T>
>>
>> for example?
>>
>>
>>
>
>
RE: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by "Boni Gopalan (BioImagene)" <Bo...@bioimagene.com>.
Sorry : It was meant to be , To : Fard !
-----Original Message-----
From: Boni Gopalan (BioImagene) [mailto:Boni.G@bioimagene.com]
Sent: 11 November 2008 09:55
To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Subject: RE: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Fabain : Runtime every generic will be an Object and ONLY of type java.lang.Object. It is not a problem with jackrabbit-ocm but a result of the way generics is implemented in Java. However you will be able to map out the object exactly the say you want to map it our by using the right converter (Bean Converter or Collection Converter) available with jackrabbit-ocm. If none is fitting your requirements writing one is very simple too. Why don't you lay out your exact requirements I will be able to help you with it. I am in the thick of a jackrabbit-ocm based persistent storage implementation and I am effextively using a generic dao (AbstractDao<T>) just like the one JCROM has. There is absolutely any doubt that jackrabbit-ocm is superior to any JCR OR mapping tools available currently.
Thanks
boni
-----Original Message-----
From: Fard [mailto:maurice.fard@gmail.com]
Sent: 10 November 2008 21:18
To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Hello Fabián,
Your example is a good example. It is exactly one of my problems.
the other things in JACROM I could not define a filed with java.lang.Object
type in my class. Beacause I would like to assign an object/s of any type
(for example String, File,...) during run time to it.
I have also used native Jackrabbit OCM and I couldn't solve my problem with
it.
So I'm looking for anather OCM for transaction with Jackrabbit.
Regards
Fard
Fabián Mandelbaum wrote:
>
> Fard escribió:
>> Hello there,
>>
>> I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have used
>> JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good
>> remedy
>> for java generic programming.
>>
>> I really really appreciate any help.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Fard
>>
> Hello Fard,
>
> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
>
> public class SomeDAO<T>
>
> for example?
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/an-alternative-OCM-%28Object-Content-Mapping%29-tp20414717p20422419.html
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
RE: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by "Boni Gopalan (BioImagene)" <Bo...@bioimagene.com>.
Fabain : Runtime every generic will be an Object and ONLY of type java.lang.Object. It is not a problem with jackrabbit-ocm but a result of the way generics is implemented in Java. However you will be able to map out the object exactly the say you want to map it our by using the right converter (Bean Converter or Collection Converter) available with jackrabbit-ocm. If none is fitting your requirements writing one is very simple too. Why don't you lay out your exact requirements I will be able to help you with it. I am in the thick of a jackrabbit-ocm based persistent storage implementation and I am effextively using a generic dao (AbstractDao<T>) just like the one JCROM has. There is absolutely any doubt that jackrabbit-ocm is superior to any JCR OR mapping tools available currently.
Thanks
boni
-----Original Message-----
From: Fard [mailto:maurice.fard@gmail.com]
Sent: 10 November 2008 21:18
To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Subject: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Hello Fabián,
Your example is a good example. It is exactly one of my problems.
the other things in JACROM I could not define a filed with java.lang.Object
type in my class. Beacause I would like to assign an object/s of any type
(for example String, File,...) during run time to it.
I have also used native Jackrabbit OCM and I couldn't solve my problem with
it.
So I'm looking for anather OCM for transaction with Jackrabbit.
Regards
Fard
Fabián Mandelbaum wrote:
>
> Fard escribió:
>> Hello there,
>>
>> I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have used
>> JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good
>> remedy
>> for java generic programming.
>>
>> I really really appreciate any help.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Fard
>>
> Hello Fard,
>
> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
>
> public class SomeDAO<T>
>
> for example?
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/an-alternative-OCM-%28Object-Content-Mapping%29-tp20414717p20422419.html
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Fard <ma...@gmail.com>.
Hello Fabián,
Your example is a good example. It is exactly one of my problems.
the other things in JACROM I could not define a filed with java.lang.Object
type in my class. Beacause I would like to assign an object/s of any type
(for example String, File,...) during run time to it.
I have also used native Jackrabbit OCM and I couldn't solve my problem with
it.
So I'm looking for anather OCM for transaction with Jackrabbit.
Regards
Fard
Fabián Mandelbaum wrote:
>
> Fard escribió:
>> Hello there,
>>
>> I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have used
>> JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good
>> remedy
>> for java generic programming.
>>
>> I really really appreciate any help.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Fard
>>
> Hello Fard,
>
> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
>
> public class SomeDAO<T>
>
> for example?
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/an-alternative-OCM-%28Object-Content-Mapping%29-tp20414717p20422419.html
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: AW: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Fard <ma...@gmail.com>.
Hello Fabián,
Thanks for helpful advices.
Regards
Maurice Fard
Fabián Mandelbaum wrote:
>
> Fard,
>
> for a class to implement Serializable, all you have to do is add
> "implements Serializable" like this:
>
> public class Bla extends BlaBla implements Serializable {
> ...
> }
>
> You may need also to declare a final int with a 'magic number' (for
> example the Eclipse IDE proposes you one which you can use, provided
> your class won't change anymore) or -1 (if your class is still 'in
> development', use this) to keep strict Java/IDEs happy.
>
> If you cannot do this, because you don't have the source or cannot
> compile class Bla yourself, you can always try the not so elegant
> solution I've proposed to someone else not long ago of a wrapper class,
> like this:
>
> //JCROM Annotations go here
> public class BlaWrapper implements Serializable {
> Bla bla;
>
> public BlaWrapper(Bla bla) {
> this.bla = bla;
> }
>
> public getBla() { return bla; }
> }
>
> and you use BlaWrapper with JCROM instead of Bla.
>
> Good luck!
>
> Fard escribió:
>> Hi
>>
>> Yes. And when I map my class with @JcrSerializedProperty annotation
>> mapped
>> to java.lang.Object field
>> during validation of the field I get an error that the field which is
>> annotated as @JcrSerializedProperty does not implement
>> java.io.Serializable
>>
>> Maurice Fard
>>
>> Hi Fard,
>>
>> have you tried the @JcrSerializedProperty JCROM annotation to map the
>> java.lang.Object field?
>> (http://code.google.com/p/jcrom/wiki/SerializedChild)
>>
>> BR,
>> Leander
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>> Von: Fard [mailto:maurice.fard@gmail.com]
>>> Gesendet: Montag, 10. November 2008 17:06
>>> An: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
>>> Betreff: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
>>>
>>>
>>> Hello Luis,
>>>
>>> Now I am working on a project and I have two weeks deadline.
>>> Unfortunatly
>>> Icannot wait.
>>> Just I explain that in JCROM I can not define a field of
>>> java.lang.Object as
>>> a childNode or Property.
>>>
>>> Fard
>>>
>>> Luis Gervaso wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Fard,
>>>>
>>>> I'm am currently working on a solution similar to JCROM, that i will
>>>> release
>>>> soon as open source tool
>>>>
>>>> can you explain your requirements, so i can include them?
>>>>
>>>> BR
>>>>
>>>> Luis
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Fabián Mandelbaum
>>>> <fm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Fard escribió:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello there,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I
>>>>>>
>>> have
>>>
>>>>> used
>>>>>
>>>>>> JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a
>>>>>>
>>> good
>>>
>>>>> remedy
>>>>>
>>>>>> for java generic programming.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I really really appreciate any help.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fard
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Hello Fard,
>>>>>
>>>>> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
>>>>>
>>>>> public class SomeDAO<T>
>>>>>
>>>>> for example?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> -------------------------------------------
>>>> Luis Alberto Gervaso Martin
>>>> Java EE Architect & Instructor
>>>> C/ Cuenca 4A, 2ºB
>>>> Getafe (Madrid)
>>>> SPAIN
>>>> mobile: (+34) 627983344
>>>> luis.gervaso@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/an-alternative-OCM-
>>> %28Object-Content-Mapping%29-tp20414717p20422743.html
>>> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>
>>
>> VVA Networks GmbH
>>
>> Mario-Leander Reimer
>> Dipl.-Inf. (FH)
>> Teamleitung Publishing Solutions
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> VVA Networks GmbH
>> : medien mit zukunft
>> Geisenhausenerstraße 15-17
>> 81379 München
>> Deutschland
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Fon: +49 89 2000375-610
>> Fax: +49 89 2000375-699
>> Mobil: +49 173 5883541
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> leander.reimer@vva-networks.de
>> www.vva-networks.de
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> HRB 33884 Düsseldorf
>> Geschäftsführer Rolf Christian Kassel
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Ein Unternehmen der VVA Kommunikation
>> http://www.vva.de
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> omnisuite® - integrate. automate. communicate.
>> http://www.omnisuite.de
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Diese Nachricht (inklusive aller Anhänge) ist vertraulich. Sie darf
>> ausschließlich durch den vorgesehenen Empfänger und Adressaten gelesen,
>> kopiert oder genutzt werden. Sollten Sie diese Nachricht versehentlich
>> erhalten haben, bitten wir, den Absender (durch Antwort-E-Mail) hiervon
>> unverzüglich zu informieren und die Nachricht zu löschen. Jede unerlaubte
>> Nutzung oder Weitergabe des Inhalts dieser Nachricht, sei es vollständig
>> oder teilweise, ist unzulässig.
>>
>> This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be
>> privileged. It may be read, copied and used only by the intended
>> recipient.
>> If you have received it in error please contact the sender (by return
>> E-Mail) immediately and delete this message. Any unauthorised use or
>> dissemination of this message in whole or in part is strictly prohibited.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/an-alternative-OCM-%28Object-Content-Mapping%29-tp20414717p20468253.html
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: AW: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Fabián Mandelbaum <fm...@gmail.com>.
Fard,
for a class to implement Serializable, all you have to do is add
"implements Serializable" like this:
public class Bla extends BlaBla implements Serializable {
...
}
You may need also to declare a final int with a 'magic number' (for
example the Eclipse IDE proposes you one which you can use, provided
your class won't change anymore) or -1 (if your class is still 'in
development', use this) to keep strict Java/IDEs happy.
If you cannot do this, because you don't have the source or cannot
compile class Bla yourself, you can always try the not so elegant
solution I've proposed to someone else not long ago of a wrapper class,
like this:
//JCROM Annotations go here
public class BlaWrapper implements Serializable {
Bla bla;
public BlaWrapper(Bla bla) {
this.bla = bla;
}
public getBla() { return bla; }
}
and you use BlaWrapper with JCROM instead of Bla.
Good luck!
Fard escribió:
> Hi
>
> Yes. And when I map my class with @JcrSerializedProperty annotation mapped
> to java.lang.Object field
> during validation of the field I get an error that the field which is
> annotated as @JcrSerializedProperty does not implement java.io.Serializable
>
> Maurice Fard
>
> Hi Fard,
>
> have you tried the @JcrSerializedProperty JCROM annotation to map the
> java.lang.Object field?
> (http://code.google.com/p/jcrom/wiki/SerializedChild)
>
> BR,
> Leander
>
>
>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Fard [mailto:maurice.fard@gmail.com]
>> Gesendet: Montag, 10. November 2008 17:06
>> An: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
>> Betreff: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
>>
>>
>> Hello Luis,
>>
>> Now I am working on a project and I have two weeks deadline.
>> Unfortunatly
>> Icannot wait.
>> Just I explain that in JCROM I can not define a field of
>> java.lang.Object as
>> a childNode or Property.
>>
>> Fard
>>
>> Luis Gervaso wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Fard,
>>>
>>> I'm am currently working on a solution similar to JCROM, that i will
>>> release
>>> soon as open source tool
>>>
>>> can you explain your requirements, so i can include them?
>>>
>>> BR
>>>
>>> Luis
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Fabián Mandelbaum
>>> <fm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Fard escribió:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello there,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I
>>>>>
>> have
>>
>>>> used
>>>>
>>>>> JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a
>>>>>
>> good
>>
>>>> remedy
>>>>
>>>>> for java generic programming.
>>>>>
>>>>> I really really appreciate any help.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>>
>>>>> Fard
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Hello Fard,
>>>>
>>>> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
>>>>
>>>> public class SomeDAO<T>
>>>>
>>>> for example?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> -------------------------------------------
>>> Luis Alberto Gervaso Martin
>>> Java EE Architect & Instructor
>>> C/ Cuenca 4A, 2ºB
>>> Getafe (Madrid)
>>> SPAIN
>>> mobile: (+34) 627983344
>>> luis.gervaso@gmail.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/an-alternative-OCM-
>> %28Object-Content-Mapping%29-tp20414717p20422743.html
>> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>
>
> VVA Networks GmbH
>
> Mario-Leander Reimer
> Dipl.-Inf. (FH)
> Teamleitung Publishing Solutions
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> VVA Networks GmbH
> : medien mit zukunft
> Geisenhausenerstraße 15-17
> 81379 München
> Deutschland
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Fon: +49 89 2000375-610
> Fax: +49 89 2000375-699
> Mobil: +49 173 5883541
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> leander.reimer@vva-networks.de
> www.vva-networks.de
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> HRB 33884 Düsseldorf
> Geschäftsführer Rolf Christian Kassel
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ein Unternehmen der VVA Kommunikation
> http://www.vva.de
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> omnisuite® - integrate. automate. communicate.
> http://www.omnisuite.de
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Diese Nachricht (inklusive aller Anhänge) ist vertraulich. Sie darf
> ausschließlich durch den vorgesehenen Empfänger und Adressaten gelesen,
> kopiert oder genutzt werden. Sollten Sie diese Nachricht versehentlich
> erhalten haben, bitten wir, den Absender (durch Antwort-E-Mail) hiervon
> unverzüglich zu informieren und die Nachricht zu löschen. Jede unerlaubte
> Nutzung oder Weitergabe des Inhalts dieser Nachricht, sei es vollständig
> oder teilweise, ist unzulässig.
>
> This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be
> privileged. It may be read, copied and used only by the intended recipient.
> If you have received it in error please contact the sender (by return
> E-Mail) immediately and delete this message. Any unauthorised use or
> dissemination of this message in whole or in part is strictly prohibited.
>
>
>
>
Re: AW: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Fard <ma...@gmail.com>.
Hi
Yes. And when I map my class with @JcrSerializedProperty annotation mapped
to java.lang.Object field
during validation of the field I get an error that the field which is
annotated as @JcrSerializedProperty does not implement java.io.Serializable
Maurice Fard
Hi Fard,
have you tried the @JcrSerializedProperty JCROM annotation to map the
java.lang.Object field?
(http://code.google.com/p/jcrom/wiki/SerializedChild)
BR,
Leander
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Fard [mailto:maurice.fard@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Montag, 10. November 2008 17:06
> An: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
>
>
> Hello Luis,
>
> Now I am working on a project and I have two weeks deadline.
> Unfortunatly
> Icannot wait.
> Just I explain that in JCROM I can not define a field of
> java.lang.Object as
> a childNode or Property.
>
> Fard
>
> Luis Gervaso wrote:
> >
> > Hi Fard,
> >
> > I'm am currently working on a solution similar to JCROM, that i will
> > release
> > soon as open source tool
> >
> > can you explain your requirements, so i can include them?
> >
> > BR
> >
> > Luis
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Fabián Mandelbaum
> > <fm...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Fard escribió:
> >> > Hello there,
> >> >
> >> > I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I
> have
> >> used
> >> > JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a
> good
> >> remedy
> >> > for java generic programming.
> >> >
> >> > I really really appreciate any help.
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> >
> >> > Fard
> >> >
> >> Hello Fard,
> >>
> >> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
> >>
> >> public class SomeDAO<T>
> >>
> >> for example?
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -------------------------------------------
> > Luis Alberto Gervaso Martin
> > Java EE Architect & Instructor
> > C/ Cuenca 4A, 2ºB
> > Getafe (Madrid)
> > SPAIN
> > mobile: (+34) 627983344
> > luis.gervaso@gmail.com
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/an-alternative-OCM-
> %28Object-Content-Mapping%29-tp20414717p20422743.html
> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
VVA Networks GmbH
Mario-Leander Reimer
Dipl.-Inf. (FH)
Teamleitung Publishing Solutions
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VVA Networks GmbH
: medien mit zukunft
Geisenhausenerstraße 15-17
81379 München
Deutschland
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fon: +49 89 2000375-610
Fax: +49 89 2000375-699
Mobil: +49 173 5883541
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
leander.reimer@vva-networks.de
www.vva-networks.de
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
HRB 33884 Düsseldorf
Geschäftsführer Rolf Christian Kassel
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ein Unternehmen der VVA Kommunikation
http://www.vva.de
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
omnisuite® - integrate. automate. communicate.
http://www.omnisuite.de
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Diese Nachricht (inklusive aller Anhänge) ist vertraulich. Sie darf
ausschließlich durch den vorgesehenen Empfänger und Adressaten gelesen,
kopiert oder genutzt werden. Sollten Sie diese Nachricht versehentlich
erhalten haben, bitten wir, den Absender (durch Antwort-E-Mail) hiervon
unverzüglich zu informieren und die Nachricht zu löschen. Jede unerlaubte
Nutzung oder Weitergabe des Inhalts dieser Nachricht, sei es vollständig
oder teilweise, ist unzulässig.
This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be
privileged. It may be read, copied and used only by the intended recipient.
If you have received it in error please contact the sender (by return
E-Mail) immediately and delete this message. Any unauthorised use or
dissemination of this message in whole or in part is strictly prohibited.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/an-alternative-OCM-%28Object-Content-Mapping%29-tp20414717p20427538.html
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
AW: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Mario-Leander Reimer <le...@vva-networks.de>.
Hi Fard,
have you tried the @JcrSerializedProperty JCROM annotation to map the java.lang.Object field? (http://code.google.com/p/jcrom/wiki/SerializedChild)
BR,
Leander
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Fard [mailto:maurice.fard@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Montag, 10. November 2008 17:06
> An: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
>
>
> Hello Luis,
>
> Now I am working on a project and I have two weeks deadline.
> Unfortunatly
> Icannot wait.
> Just I explain that in JCROM I can not define a field of
> java.lang.Object as
> a childNode or Property.
>
> Fard
>
> Luis Gervaso wrote:
> >
> > Hi Fard,
> >
> > I'm am currently working on a solution similar to JCROM, that i will
> > release
> > soon as open source tool
> >
> > can you explain your requirements, so i can include them?
> >
> > BR
> >
> > Luis
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Fabián Mandelbaum
> > <fm...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Fard escribió:
> >> > Hello there,
> >> >
> >> > I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I
> have
> >> used
> >> > JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a
> good
> >> remedy
> >> > for java generic programming.
> >> >
> >> > I really really appreciate any help.
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> >
> >> > Fard
> >> >
> >> Hello Fard,
> >>
> >> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
> >>
> >> public class SomeDAO<T>
> >>
> >> for example?
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -------------------------------------------
> > Luis Alberto Gervaso Martin
> > Java EE Architect & Instructor
> > C/ Cuenca 4A, 2ºB
> > Getafe (Madrid)
> > SPAIN
> > mobile: (+34) 627983344
> > luis.gervaso@gmail.com
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/an-alternative-OCM-
> %28Object-Content-Mapping%29-tp20414717p20422743.html
> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
VVA Networks GmbH
Mario-Leander Reimer
Dipl.-Inf. (FH)
Teamleitung Publishing Solutions
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VVA Networks GmbH
: medien mit zukunft
Geisenhausenerstraße 15-17
81379 München
Deutschland
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fon: +49 89 2000375-610
Fax: +49 89 2000375-699
Mobil: +49 173 5883541
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
leander.reimer@vva-networks.de
www.vva-networks.de
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
HRB 33884 Düsseldorf
Geschäftsführer Rolf Christian Kassel
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ein Unternehmen der VVA Kommunikation
http://www.vva.de
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
omnisuite® - integrate. automate. communicate.
http://www.omnisuite.de
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Diese Nachricht (inklusive aller Anhänge) ist vertraulich. Sie darf
ausschließlich durch den vorgesehenen Empfänger und Adressaten gelesen,
kopiert oder genutzt werden. Sollten Sie diese Nachricht versehentlich
erhalten haben, bitten wir, den Absender (durch Antwort-E-Mail) hiervon
unverzüglich zu informieren und die Nachricht zu löschen. Jede unerlaubte
Nutzung oder Weitergabe des Inhalts dieser Nachricht, sei es vollständig
oder teilweise, ist unzulässig.
This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be
privileged. It may be read, copied and used only by the intended recipient.
If you have received it in error please contact the sender (by return
E-Mail) immediately and delete this message. Any unauthorised use or
dissemination of this message in whole or in part is strictly prohibited.
Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Fard <ma...@gmail.com>.
Hello Luis,
Now I am working on a project and I have two weeks deadline. Unfortunatly
Icannot wait.
Just I explain that in JCROM I can not define a field of java.lang.Object as
a childNode or Property.
Fard
Luis Gervaso wrote:
>
> Hi Fard,
>
> I'm am currently working on a solution similar to JCROM, that i will
> release
> soon as open source tool
>
> can you explain your requirements, so i can include them?
>
> BR
>
> Luis
>
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Fabián Mandelbaum
> <fm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Fard escribió:
>> > Hello there,
>> >
>> > I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have
>> used
>> > JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good
>> remedy
>> > for java generic programming.
>> >
>> > I really really appreciate any help.
>> >
>> > Regards
>> >
>> > Fard
>> >
>> Hello Fard,
>>
>> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
>>
>> public class SomeDAO<T>
>>
>> for example?
>>
>
>
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------
> Luis Alberto Gervaso Martin
> Java EE Architect & Instructor
> C/ Cuenca 4A, 2ºB
> Getafe (Madrid)
> SPAIN
> mobile: (+34) 627983344
> luis.gervaso@gmail.com
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/an-alternative-OCM-%28Object-Content-Mapping%29-tp20414717p20422743.html
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Luis Gervaso <lu...@gmail.com>.
Hi Fard,
I'm am currently working on a solution similar to JCROM, that i will release
soon as open source tool
can you explain your requirements, so i can include them?
BR
Luis
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Fabián Mandelbaum
<fm...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Fard escribió:
> > Hello there,
> >
> > I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have used
> > JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good
> remedy
> > for java generic programming.
> >
> > I really really appreciate any help.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Fard
> >
> Hello Fard,
>
> what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
>
> public class SomeDAO<T>
>
> for example?
>
--
-------------------------------------------
Luis Alberto Gervaso Martin
Java EE Architect & Instructor
C/ Cuenca 4A, 2ºB
Getafe (Madrid)
SPAIN
mobile: (+34) 627983344
luis.gervaso@gmail.com
Re: an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping)
Posted by Fabián Mandelbaum <fm...@gmail.com>.
Fard escribió:
> Hello there,
>
> I am looking for an alternative OCM (Object Content Mapping). I have used
> JCROM and I found it is useful, but recently I found it is not a good remedy
> for java generic programming.
>
> I really really appreciate any help.
>
> Regards
>
> Fard
>
Hello Fard,
what do you mean with "Java Generic Programming"? Things like:
public class SomeDAO<T>
for example?