Thanks for this Gary. I agree with the fundamentals of the proposal as it makes sense to me to use the existing database model as a start for the new Bloodhound. I think it would be much easier to make changes to a fully formed database model than to design this from the ground up.
I will try to take part in this debate going forward. Regards John On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 at 23:41, Gary Martin <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Sorry it has been so long. I have been putting in some time to look at > various things around the Apache Bloodhound project to try to push things > along a bit. > > One of these things was to attempt to fix a problem with accessing the > issue tracker. I am not yet happy with this fix as, at least temporarily, > it leaves me as the only person with an account. This may not matter too > much if we are willing to go through re-registration (and, yes, > registration is still disabled at the moment so this may be fun to > organise) but as there may be a need for a further re-registration event > when we migrate to a Django based Bloodhound, I am reluctant to force this > upon people. Hopefully I can report on this further soon. > > Anyway, with that sorted temporarily, albeit just for me, I have been > using my access to begin putting some work into describing my current ideas > for Bloodhound at [1] - it is currently very rough but I'm hoping that it > will evolve fairly quickly with input from others. I also didn't want to > put it in place fully formed as I would prefer that others would be able to > get their ideas into the proposal. > > One of the bigger changes from what I have suggested in the past is that > it may be more pragmatic to start from database models that are closer to > those that we already have and look to change them where we think this is > appropriate, supported by Django's migration mechanism. > > I have included a diagram that I have generated from a possible > translation of the current Bloodhound database to Django models which can > be found in the proposal (or see ref [2] below for a direct link to that > attachment.) I have not proved that I have got the model equivalent in > enough detail at this point but I am planning on getting these changes > prepared for our bloodhound-core git repo shortly. > > I'm looking forward to hearing opinions on any of this. > > Cheers, > Gary > > [1] > https://live.bloodhound.apache.org/bloodhound/products/BHD/wiki/Proposals/BEP-0016 > [2] > https://live.bloodhound.apache.org/bloodhound/products/BHD/attachment/wiki/Proposals/BEP-0016/bh_models.dot.png >
