cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Published documents within sections not shown through CMIS anymore?

jreijn_
Champ in-the-making
Champ in-the-making

Hi all,

I took over the maintenance of a piece of code, which previously worked with Nuxeo DM Server 5.6. The code uses CMIS to communicate with Nuxeo and scans the published documents within a certain section. It seems this did work with Nuxeo DM 5.6 (have not validated this yet), but it does not seem to work with Nuxeo 6.0 anymore. Has something fundamentally changed with CMIS support for sections within Nuxeo? It does work when I switch it to a workspace, but that's not the intention. I want only to get published documents.

The code used is quite simple. It uses Apache Chemistry, which I have also updated from 0.9.0 to version 0.13.0 in the mean time.

CmisObject seed = session.getObjectByPath(cmisRepoConfig.getRootPath(), operationContext);
ItemIterable<CmisObject> children = ((Folder) seed).getChildren(); 

The connection uses: the following rootPath /default-domain/sections/marketing and connects via http://localhost:18080/nuxeo/atom/cmis

When I iterate the children I only get CMIS folders back, but no documents.

Any hints or tips are highly appreciated!

1 ACCEPTED ANSWER

Florent_Guillau
World-Class Innovator
World-Class Innovator

The Nuxeo CMIS connector has never showed the proxies (published in Sections). This is documented in CMIS - Model Mapping.

However I just opened NXP-17313 to add this feature because recent changes have made this possible. Please follow this ticket if you want to know more of the completion of this feature.

View answer in original post

2 REPLIES 2

Florent_Guillau
World-Class Innovator
World-Class Innovator

The Nuxeo CMIS connector has never showed the proxies (published in Sections). This is documented in CMIS - Model Mapping.

However I just opened NXP-17313 to add this feature because recent changes have made this possible. Please follow this ticket if you want to know more of the completion of this feature.

Thanks Florent! It must have been wrong in our documentation then. I'll will track the issue, because I think it adds value.