Great information, thanks. I always thought Jackrabbit to be a JCR kind of thing, didn't know it was a more generic DB kind of thing (mind you content repositories can be persisted using databases so maybe Jackrabbit is a "special use" kind of DB that offers the name-value pairs of a NoSQL-ish setup).
I don't think the Chemistry project is for creating from scratch a CMIS-ready system as much as it's for enabling messaging-level interoperability between existing CMSs from various vendors (at least between those which bother to integrate CMIS-compliant interfaces). I think I'll join its ml for a while to learn more about the kinds of explosive compounds an amateur like me can create with such chemistry sets. Either way, I'm not skilled enough to help develop an OFBiz integration with Jackrabbit or CMIS. So I'll do the typical cop-out thing: thank contributors past & present for their efforts and hope that a day comes when part of OFBiz's marketing includes blah-blah about users being able to plug in any JCR-compliant or CMIS-compliant content repository of their choosing. Project gurus might even think about thinking about the whole pay-to-stream market, cater to all those aspiring web site retailers of both live streaming and VOD (no I'm not one nor do I work for one). Are OFBiz entities among the things that get stored within the embedded CMS? Is there anything OOTB that gets stored in some database which is separate and distinct from the database for storing CMS-specific stuff? I would appreciate a wiki URL or similar resource for learning more about these related topics (OFBiz persistence mechanisms and CMS whatnot). On 15-02-28 02:24 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: > I don't think that Chemistry and Jackrabbit are the same thing at all. > Chemistry is a CMIS tool-kit. > Jackrabbit is a NoSQL database engine that can be used to build any > application that fits into a node and link model. > I think that Jackrabbit competes more directly with Mongo-DB. > > Chemistry is a higher level set of tools to build CMIS systems. > http://chemistry.apache.org/java/developing/guide.html describes > Chemistry as > > "CMIS (Content Management Interoperability Services) is a > vendor-neutralOASIS Web services interface specification > <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=cmis>that > enables interoperability between Enterprise Content Management (ECM) > systems. CMIS allows rich information to be shared across Internet > protocols in vendor-neutral formats, among document systems, publishers > and repositories, in a single enterprise and between companies." > > I think that OFBiz's entity-relationship model would not get much help > from the CMIS tools. > > http://chemistry.apache.org/java/developing/repositories/dev-repositories-jcr.html > talks about a bridge that allows Chemistry to access content stored in > Jackrabbit. > > I use Jackrabbit for the Artifact ADTransform ETVL. > Jackrabbit has the ability to use in-memory or disk storage configured > at run-time. > ADTransform uses the in-memory database configuration for speed but can > be configured to use disks if the data streams are very large and will > not fit in memory. > > OFBiz's entity database model could be implemented in Jackrabbit (or > Mongo-DB) pretty comfortably. > > Another junior member's 2 cents. > Ron > > On 28/02/2015 1:58 PM, Todd Thorner wrote: >> I can appreciate where the devs are coming from. It is possible that >> the OASIS-by-way-of-AIIM "standard" will not become anything big enough >> to bother implementing. >> >> CMIS has been making steady progress since 2008 (longer if you count the >> work AIIM had been doing on it). I wish I had stronger coding skills so >> I could walk the proverbial talk (or even better: I wish I was rich >> enough to pay an appropriate coder bounty). There are obviously plenty >> of people who use a JCR-compliant CMS solution and will continue with >> what is working for them, so finishing the remaining 10% or so of >> Jackrabbit integration has value for plenty of OFBIz users. >> >> I'm guessing that CMIS integration would offer value for even more >> users, so maybe it's a "one thing at a time" dev-ops consideration. In >> the Programming Languages section for the Jackrabbit project it says >> "Java." The Programming Languages section for the Chemistry project >> says "Java, Python, PHP, C#, Objective-C." That might not be >> meaningful, though, depending on the existing OFBiz framework and how >> Jackrabbit/CMIS would need to be implemented (server only or client-side >> interfaces as well). Like I said, I'm not exactly on the ball regarding >> the project's codebase. >> >> So, for the sake of crystal ball user gazing, would it be difficult to >> install a future OFBiz and then strip out components that the user >> doesn't anticipate needing? If I'm not mistaken that's one of the >> project's big selling points, the modularity. >> >> >> >> On 15-02-28 09:07 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>> Todd, >>> >>> Thank you for your contribution. >>> >>> As it is with all open source projects, nothing won't happen unless >>> someone >>> starts doing. The JCR integration is 80-90% there, Cemistry just >>> appeared >>> (for the first time, if my memory doesn't fail). >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Pierre >>> >>> Op zaterdag 28 februari 2015 heeft Todd Thorner >>> <tthor...@infotinuum.com> >>> het volgende geschreven: >>> >>>> Although my lack of contribution skills makes the idea of me-merit >>>> rather dubious, I feel obligated to chime in about my preference for a >>>> CMIS implementation over JSRs. Seems more language/vendor agnostic and >>>> possibly more future-proof. >>>> >>>> My merit is so dubious that I realize this might not even be what >>>> you're >>>> talking about. To me the amateur, Jackrabbit is a way to roll your own >>>> implementation of a CMS integration. If that's the same Jackrabbit >>>> you're talking about, please take a look at the Apache Chemistry >>>> project >>>> to discover (or recall) what I consider to be progress on that front. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 15-02-28 05:22 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>> Yes, you are right Pierre, we should do that on request. Maybe it's >>>>> not >>>>> too late for Jackrabbit... >>>>> >>>>> Jacques >>>>> >>>>> Le 28/02/2015 12:54, Pierre Smits a écrit : >>>>>> It is however unfortunate that we don't do issues per development >>>> branch, >>>>>> otherwise it would have been registered/visible what needs to be >>>>>> done. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Pierre >>> > >
