jackrabbit-oak-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Dürig (JIRA) <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (OAK-2413) Clarify Editor.childNodeChanged()
Date Tue, 10 Mar 2015 14:57:40 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2413?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14355007#comment-14355007

Michael Dürig commented on OAK-2413:

Committed improved Javadoc at http://svn.apache.org/r1665571.

[~anchela], could you have a look at the implementation of {{PrivilegeValidator.childNodeChanged}}
to see whether it assumes there are indeed changes? If so, we should fix this. 

> Clarify Editor.childNodeChanged()
> ---------------------------------
>                 Key: OAK-2413
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2413
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: core
>            Reporter: Marcel Reutegger
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 1.2
> The current contract for {{Editor.childNodeChanged()}} does not specify if this method
may also be called when the child node did not actually change. The method {{NodeStateDiff.childNodeChanged()}}
explicitly states that there may be such calls. Looking at the implementation connecting the
two classes, {{EditorDiff.childNodeChange()}} simply calls the editor without checking whether
the child node did in fact change.
> I think we either have to change the {{EditorDiff}} or update the contract for the Editor
and adjust implementations. E.g. right now, PrivilegeValidator (implements Editor), assumes
a call to {{childNodeChange()}} indeed means the child node changed.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message