[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-4046?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15604160#comment-15604160
 ] 

Carsten Ziegeler commented on JCR-4046:
---------------------------------------

Getting back to Sling's use case :) We don't want to have the change reported 
on the parent for every child named "jcr:content", just for files.
So for example, there is a listener registered at /libs listening for all 
changes, add, removals. But only for change events for jcr:content child nodes 
of a file, the change should be reported on the parent. For add/remove this is 
not needed as explained in the summary and for other node types it would be 
wrong and break existing code.

> Improve observation of files
> ----------------------------
>
>                 Key: JCR-4046
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-4046
>             Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: core
>            Reporter: Carsten Ziegeler
>         Attachments: JCR-4046.patch
>
>
> A file in JCR is represented by at least two nodes, the nt:file node and a 
> child node named jcr:content holding the contents of the file (and metadata).
> This has the consequence that if the contents of a file changes, a change 
> event of the jcr:content node is reported - but not of the nt:file node.
> This makes creating listeners listening for changes in files complicated, as 
> you can't use the file name to filter  - especially with glob patterns (see 
> JCR-4044) this becomes troublesome.
> In addition, whenever you get a change for a jcr:content node, you have to 
> check if the parent is a nt:file node and decide based on the result.
> It would be great to have a flag on the JackrabbitEventFilter to enable 
> smarter reporting just for nt:files: if a property on jcr:content is changed, 
> a change to the nt:file node is reported.
> See also SLING-6163 and OAK-4940



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to