nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

As we transition to the new Hyland Community, some post links may be temporarily disrupted as we finalize redirects. We apologize for the inconvenience and are working to resolve this as quickly as possible. Details.

JCR Implementation

rdanner

Is there any plan to expose the Alfresco impl behind RMI?

I guess one could argue that web service interfaces defeat the purpose. RMI interfaces is more natural to java users.

anywho… just wondering.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

davidc

Not in the short term. But as 170 is a standard, RMI implementation layers will appear (I think JackRabbit has one) which could be hosted on top our local interface. The only thing to consider is performance - 170 is a chatty interface, so the RMI implementation needs to be carefully map 170 interface calls to underlying RMI calls.

rdanner

Not in the short term. But as 170 is a standard, RMI implementation layers will appear (I think JackRabbit has one) which could be hosted on top our local interface. The only thing to consider is performance - 170 is a chatty interface, so the RMI implementation needs to be carefully map 170 interface calls to underlying RMI calls.

I can see how performance might be an issue. It's going to be an issue with any remote api. Like you said, the JCR requires a lot of calls which could be rather expensive.

I am not really thrilled about RMI anyway. I put some RMI wrappers around a number of the JCR interfaces just to build out a toy. I didn't want to have alfresco loaded directly below my app. At this point I am not seeing too much of penalty.

I will look at jackrabbit, maybe I should just reuse the work they have there.