Jackrabbit Content Repository
  1. Jackrabbit Content Repository
  2. JCR-1944

Privilege content representation should be of property type NAME

    Details

    • Type: Improvement Improvement
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: 1.5
    • Fix Version/s: 1.6
    • Component/s: jackrabbit-core, security
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      the content representation of jcr privileges should reflect that fact that privilege names changed from simple string to JCR name.

        Activity

        Hide
        angela added a comment -

        changed property definition in built-in nodetypes and adjusted the corresponding createValue/setProperty calls to user PropertyType.NAME.

        Show
        angela added a comment - changed property definition in built-in nodetypes and adjusted the corresponding createValue/setProperty calls to user PropertyType.NAME.
        Hide
        Jukka Zitting added a comment -

        Changing this to an improvement issue as the original implementation was in line with previous spec text (and I don't think we should merge this to 1.5).

        BTW, do you think this should be noted in the 1.6 release notes for people who are already trying out the new security code? I'm not sure how big an impact the changed property type will cause.

        Show
        Jukka Zitting added a comment - Changing this to an improvement issue as the original implementation was in line with previous spec text (and I don't think we should merge this to 1.5). BTW, do you think this should be noted in the 1.6 release notes for people who are already trying out the new security code? I'm not sure how big an impact the changed property type will cause.
        Hide
        angela added a comment -

        > I don't think we should merge this to 1.5

        no, rather not.

        > BTW, do you think this should be noted in the 1.6 release notes for
        > people who are already trying out the new security code? I'm not sure
        > how big an impact the changed property type will cause.

        big. that's why i scheduled it for 2.0.0.

        but after all the 283 implementation is still work in progress and Issue #JCR-1588 has not been closed up to now. unless the spec is finalized there may be any kind of changes that break backwards compability.

        listing in in the release notes may still be a good idea.

        Show
        angela added a comment - > I don't think we should merge this to 1.5 no, rather not. > BTW, do you think this should be noted in the 1.6 release notes for > people who are already trying out the new security code? I'm not sure > how big an impact the changed property type will cause. big. that's why i scheduled it for 2.0.0. but after all the 283 implementation is still work in progress and Issue # JCR-1588 has not been closed up to now. unless the spec is finalized there may be any kind of changes that break backwards compability. listing in in the release notes may still be a good idea.

          People

          • Assignee:
            angela
            Reporter:
            angela
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            0 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved:

              Development