On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Adam van den Hoven <
adam.vandenho...@gmail.com> wrote:

> You should also consider that if you're going to keep a version history
> that only one revision (and certainly not necessarily the "current"
> revision) should be published. This will allow you make a number of changes
> to a page (especially useful if you extend the page preview extension to
> work with versions) without affecting the current public version. This would
> also allow you to reduce the size of the version history by keeping all the
> incremental edits once this version is "published" collapse the version
> history down to the published version. This gives you a history that
> includes all the published versions and all the incremental changes since
> the last published version.
>
> The core development team may want to consider a modification to the core
> status properties which will (a) make it easier to do versioning as I've
> mentioned and (b) make things clearer. The change is to break the current
> status into 2 two fields. The first would be called "status" and would have
> values like "draft", "reviewed", "published". The second field would be
> "visibility" and would have values like "visible" and "invisible". Visible
> and the three status values map directly to the current status values, and
> published + invisible is the same as the current hidden status. This allows
> you separate the purpose of a page (RSS, CSS, etc) from its status. I think
> this simplifies the meaning of things since whether or not a page is
> publicly accessible is completely independent of whether or not that page
> appears in navigation. It will also make it easier, I think, to create a
> workflow extension.
>


As long as we're in pie-in-the-sky mode, this scheme sounds really good. As
someone who would not be able to help with any part of its implementation, I
say go for it. I will help to document it once I figure it out how it works,
though.


~Nate
_______________________________________________
Radiant mailing list
Post:   Radiant@radiantcms.org
Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/
Site:   http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant

Reply via email to