On 15 November 2010 08:41, LAURENT Henri-Damien <[email protected]> wrote: > Le 11/11/2010 04:07, Chris Cormack a écrit : >>> Question for Mr. 3.4 RM: >>> >> :) >> >>> Is the procedure for dealing with DB revision numbers still the same? As far >>> as I remember from the 3.2 development days, the procedure was to patch >>> kohastructure.sql (or sysprefs.sql, or whatever), then add the update to the >>> end of updatedatabase.pl with a generic version number, like 3.01.00.XXX. >>> Patching kohastructure.pl was left to the RM when they applied the patch. >> >> Patching kohaversion.pl you mean? >>> >>> I had a crazy table on the wiki for a bit, but this seemed to work better. >>> >>> That still the consensus? >>> >> Yup that is the current practice. >> >> If we do implement DBIx::Class::Schema and >> DBIx::Class::Schema::Versioned, updatedatabase.pl and kohastructure.pl >> might both go away. But not yet. > Well, as far as DB structure is concerned, this is ok. > But if we need some new systempreference or some new data in the > database (for instance some change in the marc framework...) then Schema > and its versioning system would not be enough. Any plans for that ?
Thats a good question, one I don't have a good answer for yet, but I do think your atomic updates work is certainly a step in the right direction. ANSI compliant sql inserts/updates for the win :) Chris _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
