Hi, On 09.02.2010 21:11, Justin Edelson wrote: > Thanks for your feedback. What do you think about SessionConfigurer as > the interface name?
Sounds good, yes. Regards Felix > > Justin > > On 2/9/10 1:58 PM, Felix Meschberger wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 09.02.2010 17:47, Justin Edelson wrote: >> >>> Posted a code review here: http://codereview.appspot.com/207045 >>> >> Looks good to me. Comments: >> >> * I started defining a SERVICE_NAME constant in service interfaces >> to prevent doing the Fully.Quallified.Class.Name.class stuff... >> >> * How about calling this something like along the lines of >> "setup" ? "PostProcessor" to me sounds more like additional >> steps in a pipeline... (remember I am native german speaker ;-) ) >> >> * Shouldn't the interface go into the JCR API (along the >> SlingRepository interface) ? And along these lines extend the >> specification of the SlingRepository interface to consider the >> PostProcessors before returning the session on login ? >> >> +1 to go from my part. >> >> Regards >> Felix >> >> >>> On 2/9/10 3:41 AM, Felix Meschberger wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> What exactly do you envision doing with the session ? >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Felix >>>> >>>> On 09.02.2010 02:46, Justin Edelson wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> I need to add some logic to post-process Session instances before they >>>>> are used for resource resolution. At first glance, it seems like >>>>> what I >>>>> should do is create an interface in jcr.base and add a >>>>> ServiceTracker to >>>>> AbstractSlingRepository. Something like this: >>>>> >>>>> public interface SessionPostProcessor { >>>>> public void postProcess(Session session); >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> WDYT? >>>>> >>>>> Justin >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> > >
