My previous message I asked that we only use Backup/Restore as the
feature name but I didn't give any of my thoughts as to why so
muddled the conversation (thanks Andi and others for calling me on this)
What is in the background that makes me request this is the work that
I'll be doing to blend both the currently Backup/Restore work that
Andi has already done to make a copy of your current repository so it
can be transferred to another Chandler and the new code that will do
a Dump/Reload of the user data in such a way that is schema-version
independent.
Currently Backup/Restore (both available from the File menu) allow a
user to make a backup of the repository that can be moved to another
Chandler (any platform but they have to be running the same Chandler
version.)
The soon-to-be Dump/Reload would take the current repository and
export it using EIMM so that it's schema-version independent.
I muddled the issue in my previous message because I'm currently
thinking that I will be able to code Dump/Reload in such a way as to
allow it to not only dump user specific data but also the various
other repository stored information that glues the user data together
*and* to also include the changeset information.
I think it can be done but as Andi pointed out in IRC, I shouldn't
pre-empt the term Backup/Restore until I have delivered this new
version.
On that point I agree - so I need to continue to use the terms that
we wrangled about earlier when writing about them:
Backup/Restore - as currently defined by the File menu items
Dump/Reload - new feature that will output EIMM encoded repository
data (what data is still being worked on)
Have I un-muddled myself?
thanks,
---
bear
Build and Release Engineer
Open Source Applications Foundation (OSAF)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.osafoundation.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://code-bear.com
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
