Hi Folks, It seems like we've reached a point where schema changes that affect data definitions are relatively rare. I'm wondering if it would be worthwhile for dogfooders if we made our schema change system more fine grained?
Bryan and I had a conversation this morning about distinguishing between three different types of schema changes: A) to data, which would be destructive until PJE's schema evolution is up and running B) to index definitions, which would require re-indexing existing items but wouldn't cause items to be lost C) UI schema changes, that could be handled by rebuilding the UI My sense is that changes of the first sort are happening on the order of once a week. Although Morgen's save/restore work is great, I still notice as a dogfooder that I use Chandler less than I would if I didn't have to restore so often (OK, I don't have to use the trunk to dogfood, but I'd prefer to if I can). There's overlap with PJE's work on schema evolution here, I'm not sure if the timeframe for his work makes this proposal unnecessary, but I don't think it would be terribly time consuming to get something like this up and running. Sincerely, Jeffrey _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
