Hi Thorsten, you are right, we should see the ContentEntity as the raw data store.
So I would like to add a new ParserData interface for representing the data extracted by the parser. Each parser could come up with there own implementation and so you could easily define your own extracted data fields based on the parser implementation. Having a build bot for both the current trunk and the branch is a great idea. I could also maintain the builds at jenkins, but I don't have the rights to do that. So if you like, you could also grant access to me. Another great improvement could be to add droids to the apache git mirrors. http://git.apache.org/ Maybe that could attract developers to contribute to the project. Tobias On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Thorsten Scherler <[email protected]>wrote: > On 02/08/2013 04:24 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > Author: tobr > > Date: Fri Feb 8 15:24:12 2013 > > New Revision: 1444064 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1444064 > > Log: > > moved anchortext from linkedtask to content entity > > Changed collection type of getTo to LinkedTask > > > > Modified: > > > incubator/droids/branches/0.2.x-cleanup/droids-core/src/main/java/org/apache/droids/core/ContentEntity.java > > > incubator/droids/branches/0.2.x-cleanup/droids-core/src/main/java/org/apache/droids/core/LinkedTask.java > > > > Modified: > incubator/droids/branches/0.2.x-cleanup/droids-core/src/main/java/org/apache/droids/core/ContentEntity.java > > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/droids/branches/0.2.x-cleanup/droids-core/src/main/java/org/apache/droids/core/ContentEntity.java?rev=1444064&r1=1444063&r2=1444064&view=diff > > > ============================================================================== > > --- > incubator/droids/branches/0.2.x-cleanup/droids-core/src/main/java/org/apache/droids/core/ContentEntity.java > (original) > > +++ > incubator/droids/branches/0.2.x-cleanup/droids-core/src/main/java/org/apache/droids/core/ContentEntity.java > Fri Feb 8 15:24:12 2013 > > @@ -27,6 +27,9 @@ import java.util.Set; > > * The predefined members are shortcuts to default fields. > > * Otherwise you can put your meta data in the Map using your own key. > > * > > + * TODO Storing the data in a map does not seem to be the best way. > > + * Maybe we should split it up to separate members? > > > > Well, that is the reason why we had them in the task and not in the > content entity. I thing that the content entity should be a a simple > rep/wrapper of the url response. What we are now doing is to use it as > storage unit but do not really have any reserved keys listed that cannot > be used or to be more general no logic to control/manage the contentEntity. > > I think that the task is the best place to store things that we extract > in the parser besides the request associated parameters. > > BTW we may look into setting up a jenkins/build bot for the branch on > the asf, for now I am monitoring with our company jenkins the build but > had not configured well the mail notifications so the above commit slipped. > > salu2 > > -- > Thorsten Scherler <scherler.at.gmail.com> > codeBusters S.L. - web based systems > <consulting, training and solutions> > > http://www.codebusters.es/ > >
