Rickard Öberg wrote:
Georg Ragaller wrote:
Rickard Öberg wrote:
Georg Ragaller wrote:
Would'nt it be better to specify the migration rules as diffs (or
better patches) from one version to its direct successor, plus the
version history,
and let the migrator service determine which patches to apply in
the correct order?
Yes, that is what I had in mind, but I realize that "onVersion"
doesn't show that. It should be "toVersion", and then it should work
exactly as you say.
Good, but should'nt it be something like
"betweenVersions("predecessor","successor"), i.e. one edge in the
history?
Why? If I have 1.1 then 1.2 and then 1.3, but a schema change only
occured in 1.4, why would I have to specify the start point instead of
just saying "in 1.4 this change happened". What help would the
predecessor info give you?
With a linear history this might be enough, but consider this history:
1.0 -> 1.1 -> 1.2
| ^
---> 1.0.1 -|
1.0 -> 1.1 adds property X
1.0 -> 1.0.1 adds properties X and Y
1.1 -> 1.2 adds Y
1.0.1 -> 1.2 adds nothing
how should the 'toVersion("1.2")' rule then look like?
Cheers,
Georg
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
