Den 7. des. 2010 kl. 18.21 skrev Bob Jolliffe: > To me versioning is not different to stable. ie if a metadata item > has an id of 42, an owner of "Kenya National MOH" and a version of > 2.4, then I (ideally) expect that id to be constant in perpetuity for > that version.
I agree (of course), but I'm not sure I understand the implications. As far as I can tell versioning wasn't in your discussion on identifiers, do you think you want it there? If versioning is going to be part of the id regime, like in the above example, it would also have to be part of the discussion, somehow.. If it's not going to be there, I think it would be good to at least have some discussions on what to do for the most immediate use cases that would need some way to coordinate metadata changes. A third option would of course be that it is too ambitious for us to try to coordinate on versioning issues for the time being, but then I think it would be good if we could managed to at least explicitly agree on that. The main reason for my interest is that on the mobile side, we're going to have to come up with some solution for versioning. Just as I guess you already have had to make some sort of versioning for import-export use cases. And, as Olas original mail pointed to, there is a potential use case for better support for syncing dhis instances. Should we just think of versioning as a specific use case issue for the time being, or would we be able to take some small steps to at least avoid unnecessary fragmentation? I guess both fragmentation and coordination have their built-in challenges, I gather that the silence on the topic maybe should be taken as a signal that we should go with the first option for the time being? :) Jo _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs Post to : dhis2-devs@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
