Hi Henning,
the prefix should identify the module the table belongs to (as there are
no tables belonging to core itself :) ).
Klaus also suggested that the tables should be linked to the modules and
not to some classes of modules.
The prefix can be the module name or a short version of it (example
usrloc -> ul).
Any other opinion on this matter is welcomed.
regards,
bogdan
Henning Westerholt wrote:
On Montag, 14. Mai 2007, you wrote:
Hi there,
should be first a discussion about what possibilities are, like approach
and then as already existing tools. Before getting to writing code or
scripts, maybe a fair analysis will be good.
From development effort point of view, I still think that first we need
a DB cleanup (as naming and installation procedures) before getting into
more complex tools.
I agree that a step at a time is good, but also a bottom up approach is
even better - it will same a lot of changes and re-changes....
Hello Bogdan,
what are you're suggestions for the prefix? Simply
add "core", "presence", "serweb" and "extra" to the table names? Or a fixed
prefix as you suggested in your last e-mail?
Cheers,
Henning
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
