[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1664?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jukka Zitting resolved JCR-1664.
--------------------------------
Resolution: Fixed
Assignee: Jukka Zitting
Patch applied in revision 681031. Resolving as Fixed.
> JNDI Referencable Issues
> ------------------------
>
> Key: JCR-1664
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1664
> Project: Jackrabbit
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: jackrabbit-core
> Affects Versions: core 1.4.5, 1.5
> Environment: linux glassfish jndi spring
> Reporter: Nicholas Stuart
> Assignee: Jukka Zitting
> Fix For: 1.5
>
> Attachments: JCR-1664.patch, JCR-1664.patch, out.patch
>
>
> I'm questioning the use of Referencable in the BindableResource and
> BindableResourceFactory classes for the JNDI lookup process. Reason for this
> is because Referencable needs the Addrs to be in the EXACT order in order for
> it to be considered the same. (see
> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/api/javax/naming/Reference.html#equals(java.lang.Object)
> )
> In order for me to get the JNDI reference to be found correctly I had to
> change the BindableResource.getReference method to swap the order the
> StringReferences were added to match up what was being passed in by
> glassfish. This seems EXTREMELY fragile to me as I don't know what order, say
> JBoss, would pass the StringRefences in in the Reference object for the
> Factory method.
> Also, another problem is that getReference is binding the class name to
> BindableRepository class implementation and not javax.jcr.Repository. This
> again causes them not to match if you follow the example on the wiki on
> setting up the JNDI reference and use javax.jcr.Repository as the type. This
> can either be fixed by changing the JNDI reference to use the
> BindableRepository class or the change the BindableRepository class to set
> that to the Repository interface. Not sure which would be considered 'better'
> I have a patch that fixes the first issue (at least for glassfish), but not
> the second. Again, this seems like a really 'breakable' setup right now and
> not sure what would be better to make sure this is avoided.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
