Hi Kimbro,
Glad you're back. I just wanted to point you directly to the code that
I
submitted regarding my metadata implementation. You can see the two latest
threads discussing it in the archives at:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=103828933700002&r=1&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=103946444400005&r=1&w=2
And you can download and examine the patch at
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xindice-dev&m=103946437104874&w=2
Basically, this discussion is very reminiscent of the older discussion
thread on metadata. (cf
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=102873960400001&r=1&w=2 for that thread)
Unfortunately, we can't seem to reach a consensus. I agree with Guanugo
that something is better than nothing. That's why I wrapped up all my
changes and submitted the patch. I'm not sure how to proceed, but I would
strongly advocate working toward a solution that enables metadata storage
(and of course, I'm volunteering to support my additions).
Let me know what you think of the implementation.
thanks
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Gianugo Rabellino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 7:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Back from the dead
Kimbro Staken wrote:
>
> On Saturday, December 14, 2002, at 07:28 AM, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
>
>>
>> Oh well... I think that almost all the questions and the topic being
>> addressed are perfect candidates for your opinion. :-) I, for one,
>> would like to know what you think about:
>>
>> 1. releasing 1.1: what's left to do, what can/should be included, how
>> can we fix that annoying Xupdate bug...
>>
> I'm not up to date enough to really comment on this, I've read quite a
> few archive messages, but I still missed a thousand or two. Can someone
> provide a summary of where things stand?
AFAIK we have two major areas to work on before release:
1. Finish the XML-RPC driver, which is incomplete ATM.
2. Run through Bugzilla and fix the reported bugs (Xupdate is the bug
showstopper here)
>> 2. metadata. We have been discussing a bit about them, but it looks
>> like we can't really find an agreement.
>
>
> My opinion on this has always been that I'll respect the opinion of
> others. :-) Last I knew we had two competing proposals, what happened
> with that?
Well, we have an implementation made by Dave Viner, but looks like there
is no consensus in incorporating it. My take on that is that some
metadata are much better than any metadata at all, but that's MHO.
>> 3. Xindice 2.0. There have been dome threads about it: what is your
>> opinion on the various issues that have been brought up?
>>
> So far most of what I've seen in the archive is about Avalon, which is
> something I'm skeptical about. I agree with James that we should really
> focus more on improving the actual database engine rather then
> continuing to refactor the software architecture.
True, but Avalon would help us in that direction, letting us focus on
code alone. Stefano already volunteered to bootstrap that, so I'd be +1
on considering it.
> However, it's also
> probably the case that there are people who will be far better able to
> help in that area then within the core engine so I'm just looking
> forward to watching how that proceeds and putting what time I can into
> working on the database internals.
> Is there a list somewhere showing what people are currently thinking
> about 2.0 featurewise?
A good starting point might be
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=103839556100006&r=1&w=2&n=33
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=103839556100006&r=1&w=2&n=11
Ciao,
--
Gianugo
