19 messages in org.apache.jackrabbit.devRe: Content Object Mapping - jcrom.org
FromSent OnAttachments
David NueschelerFeb 5, 2008 3:47 am 
Alexandru Popescu ☀Feb 5, 2008 4:11 am 
Jukka ZittingFeb 5, 2008 4:16 am 
Christophe LombartFeb 5, 2008 4:43 am 
Alex LukinFeb 5, 2008 4:47 am 
David NueschelerFeb 5, 2008 4:53 am 
IvanLatyshFeb 5, 2008 6:40 am 
Alexandru Popescu ☀Feb 5, 2008 9:20 am 
Alexandru Popescu ☀Feb 5, 2008 9:23 am 
Alex LukinFeb 5, 2008 10:25 am 
Christophe LombartFeb 5, 2008 10:53 am 
Jukka ZittingFeb 5, 2008 11:37 am 
Padraic HannonFeb 5, 2008 11:59 am 
Alex LukinFeb 5, 2008 12:05 pm 
Christophe LombartFeb 5, 2008 12:49 pm 
Alex LukinFeb 5, 2008 1:01 pm 
Alexander KlimetschekFeb 6, 2008 10:54 am 
oggMay 16, 2008 4:06 am 
Jukka ZittingMay 16, 2008 5:09 am 
Actions with this message:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Atom feed for this thread
Paste this URL into your reader:
Subject:Re: Content Object Mapping - jcrom.orgActions...
From:Christophe Lombart (chri@gmail.com)
Date:Feb 5, 2008 4:43:13 am
List:org.apache.jackrabbit.dev

There are commons points between both solutions in term of annotations but JCROM doesn't support lazy loading, interface and ínheritance, custom converter, .... Futhermore Jackrabbit OCM makes more abstraction on the JCR API which is not the case of JCROM. I personnally perfer to maximize this kind of abstraction .

+1 to make more investigation on JPA.

Christophe

On Feb 5, 2008 12:48 PM, David Nuescheler <dav@day.com> wrote:

hi all,

Olafur Gauti Gudmundsson pointed me today to his effort called JCROM (pronounced "Jack-rom"). [1]

I am excited about the refreshing, quick and simple annotation based approach [2] and would like to find out what everybody's thoughts are on possibly finding synergies with the ocm framework that we have in Jackrabbit.

regards, david

[1] http://jcrom.org [2] http://code.google.com/p/jcrom/wiki/TwoMinuteIntro