I have to say I agree that the software shouldn't encourage people to hack into the repository database..
As I have alluded to already, I have spent a bit of time in the db structure and it aint user friendly in any sense of the word.. (1 or 2 char table and field names are great for the programmer, not for the data analyst trying to understand their thinking :) Realistically.. anybody playing with fossil is a) comfortable with the command line and b) probably comfortable with databases in general and c) likely to be able to download another single exe (ie sqlite) to manage said database.. So I honestly can't see any advantage to it.. cheers Daniel Eric wrote: > On Fri, March 20, 2009 7:23 am, "Benjohn Barnes" <benj...@fysh.org> wrote: > >> Perhaps this is too heavy weight (and perhaps it's really obvious), but >> a sensible approach might be to provide a set views to the users, rather >> than direct table access? >> >> * These could probably provide more suitable information for >> scripting than raw tables, >> * They would provide abstraction from the tables, which might change >> with new versions, >> * They would (I think?) be read only, which seems like a good thing >> for a query interface. >> * They might encourage an environment where people provide additional >> views (on the existing views, or on the underlying data) that are useful >> for particular query tasks. > > I don't know how many views might be necessary, there might be tables that > shouldn't be visible at all. The ability to create your own views might > also be useful. > >> On the other hand, it might be useful to be able to slice and dice and >> write to the database as you see fit... >> > > BUT - it has to be all read-only, subverting an SCM repository is a > instant loss-of-checkin-rights/dismissal offence as far as I (and most SCM > people) am concerned. If you don't fully understand the schema you will > get it wrong eventually. Back door access is only for critical repair, the > software should seriously discourage it. > > There, I've proved that I'm really an SCM tyrant at heart. But you _do_ > have to be careful not to break your repository. > > Regards, > > Eric > > P.S. Whoever though that "Subversion" was a good name for an SCM tool? > > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users > _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
