HEADS UP: JCR-RMI remote interfaces changed

[Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

I just committed (revision 365458) a change to JCR-RMI that changes a
number of the remote interfaces to use network-optimized iterators
instead of simple arrays to pass potentially large sequences of
objects (e.g. QueryResult.getNodes). Please note this if you are
building JCR-RMI to be used with a client or server application that
uses a previously built JCR-RMI jar.

I'll be making other similar changes to JCR-RMI for the next week or
two in order to streamline and optimize the interfaces. After that I
hope freeze the JCR-RMI interfaces for a stable 1.0 version that could
hopefully be bundled with the Jackrabbit 1.0 release.

If you have any wishes for improvements or other feature requests that
you'd like to see included in 1.0, please let me know. Please also
note that JCR-RMI may be a bit unstable during this period so you may
want to avoid upgrading your existing jars unless you want to help in
testing and development. :-)

BR,

Jukka Zitting

--
Yukatan - http://yukatan.fi/ - info@yukatan.fi
Software craftmanship, JCR consulting, and Java development

Re: HEADS UP: JCR-RMI remote interfaces changed

[Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

On 1/3/06, Felix Meschberger <Fe...@day.com> wrote:
> Currently JCR-RMI has its own implementations of the Value and
> ValueFactory interfaces. How about reusing the implementations of the
> "jackrabbit-commons". This might prevent needless server-side value
> copying and would also solve the current issue we have with the Date
> value, which does not really support ISO806 in its full breadth.

Good point. I'm not sure if the standard Jackrabbit ValueFactory
produces network-safe Values. In any case we should probably better
align the codebases. I'll take a look at this.

BR,

Jukka Zitting

--
Yukatan - http://yukatan.fi/ - info@yukatan.fi
Software craftmanship, JCR consulting, and Java development

Re: HEADS UP: JCR-RMI remote interfaces changed

[Felix Meschberger <Fe...@day.com>]

Hi Jukka,

Happy new year and a big chear ! Thanks.
> If you have any wishes for improvements or other feature requests that
> you'd like to see included in 1.0, please let me know.
Currently JCR-RMI has its own implementations of the Value and 
ValueFactory interfaces. How about reusing the implementations of the 
"jackrabbit-commons". This might prevent needless server-side value 
copying and would also solve the current issue we have with the Date 
value, which does not really support ISO806 in its full breadth.

Regards
Felix