Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

OAK-6772: Convert oak-solr-core to OSGi R7 annotations #1365

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: trunk
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mbaedke
Copy link
Contributor

@mbaedke mbaedke commented Mar 12, 2024

No description provided.

Removed redundant type conversions.
Replaced component properties with configuration type methods.
Fixed property names.
@mbaedke mbaedke requested a review from kwin March 21, 2024 10:57
collapseJcrContentNodes = Boolean.valueOf(String.valueOf(componentContext.getProperties().get(COLLAPSE_JCR_CONTENT_NODES)));
collapseJcrContentParents = Boolean.valueOf(String.valueOf(componentContext.getProperties().get(COLLAPSE_JCR_CONTENT_PARENTS)));
protected void activate(Configuration configuration) {
pathChildrenFieldName = configuration.path_child_field();
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would remove this indirection, just store the object

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Imho hat would need a new Jira issue.

String solr_conf_dir() default SolrServerConfigurationDefaults.CONFIGURATION_DIRECTORY;

String name() default "remote";
}

private String solrHttpUrl;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would remove all fields except for remoteSolrServerConfiguration

Copy link
Contributor Author

@mbaedke mbaedke Nov 7, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That is also not in the scope of OAK-6772, is it?

@mbaedke mbaedke requested a review from kwin November 7, 2024 15:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants