Hi, 2010/2/3 Joe Atzberger <ohioc...@gmail.com>: > On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Michael Hafen <mdha...@tech.washk12.org> > wrote: > I realize I haven't been pushing code towards Koha for maybe half a year > now, but I honestly don't think that DB revisions were a big enough problem > to have us abandon the advantages of the current approach without a more > pronounced incentive.
Quickly, from my point of view the main things I'd like to see in a revised database update system are: * the ability to end up with a linear set of database updates in released versions, for the reasons Joe mentions * secondarily, the ability to have a linear path in HEAD * a reduction in purely textual merge conflicts - splitting up the monolithic updatedatabase.pl would go a long way to address this * a better way to manage database updates that are backported to the maintenance branch * a mechanism to allow a developer to readily renumber updates that they're working on in a topic branch when it comes time to submit to HEAD * getting simple system preference updates out of the main Regards, Galen -- Galen Charlton gmcha...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@lists.koha.org http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
