mikebridge commented on issue #39492: URL: https://github.com/apache/superset/issues/39492#issuecomment-4444950388
> Hey [@mikebridge](https://github.com/mikebridge), quick clarifications on a few of those points: > > On the extension idea — yeah, I think that's the right framing. The two approaches really do solve different problems and shouldn't be competing for the same persistence layer. SIP-210 makes sense for the in-DB queryable history (per-field diffs, ETag, all the stuff the V2 UI needs), and an external-store extension makes sense for deployments that want zero DB footprint and the audit trail somewhere their security/legal team already watches. If the extension exposes a couple of clean hooks (on_entity_saved, restore), it can either layer on top of SIP-210 or stand alone — operators get to pick. @anthonyhungnguyen Agreed, yeah, I think your take on it and it would be a valuable addition (especially for `is_managed_externally`, I think?) but my feeling is that there isn't 100% overlap between the use cases. SIP-210's particular use case might be summarized as "there's a problem and a user needs to recover an earlier version that works", and to a lesser extent "the user need to figure out what went wrong", but I'm more focused on assisting them with that than guaranteeing bulletproof compliance. And with etags I'm also thinking down the road to preventing concurrent edits. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
