Rename ContentRichEntity to Resource

[niklasnatter]

I would like to propose to rename the ContentRichEntityInterface to ResourceInterface.

I see the following reasons for doing this:

• Sulu uses the term Resource for an entity that is displayed in the administration interface
• We already have methods that use the Resource term: DimensionContentInterface::getResourceKey, RoutableInterface::getResourceId
• Resource is less bulky than ContentRichEntity and would make the bundle code easier to read and easier to talk about
• Together with Rename DimensionContent to Content #90, this simplifies the core terms/entities/concepts of the bundle and therefore makes it easier to understand for new developers

[alexander-schranz]

I personally think we should get ride of the ContentRichEntityInterface / ResourceInterface completely. As it should be possible to add Content to every Doctrine Entity, also if it comes from a third party bundle where we are not able to add an Interface our self.

Currently the ContentRIchEntityInterface has the following methods:

• getId()
• getDimensionContents()
• createDimensionContent()
• addDimensionContent(DimensionContentInterface $dimensionContent)
• removeDimensionContent(DimensionContentInterface $dimensionContent):

And the DimensionContentInterface reference to it with the following methods:

• getResource()
• getResourceKey()
• getResourceId (RoutableInterface)

So we could replace the exist function:

• getId() -> getResourceId()
• getDimensionContents() -> DimensionContentRepository should be used here
• createDimensionContent() -> DimensionContentInterface::create function given the resource object create(object $resource)
• addDimensionContent(DimensionContentInterface $dimensionContent) -> not needed if a relation on doctrine exist can be called in create could call the add on the resource
• removeDimensionContent(DimensionContentInterface $dimensionContent): -> never used or called by us

[niklasnatter]

Yes, getting rid of the ContentRichEntityInterface would be even better! But I think its also more work unfortunately 🙂
Do you want to create a separate issue for that?

[alexander-schranz]

Created a seperate issue for it: #183