Ok so lets say we install 50 "core" searches with the package. If the user wants all the searches, would they need to download all the other 200+ searches from the web? one at a time?
I know I probably sound like a broken record but isn't it much much more logical just to install all the searches and find a way to enable/disable them? Does this not ease a lot of the problems? Monty > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kim Gr�sman > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 5:12 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [DQSD-Devel] httpinst feature requests > > > Hi Brent, > > > I'd like for httpinst to > > also check to see if the file already exists and > > prompt the user if they want to overwrite it. > > I'll look into it. Piece of cake. just over-write it!.. why prompt the user? If the user has modified searches then they are in the wrong directory anyway. > > > Second, I'd love to have versioning so that I could > > get a list of updated searches and update just those > > searches and also stop people from installing older > > searches than they've already got. > > I've briefly thought about something like a search directory per site, > and possibly a search site directory, where these versioning thoughts > would come in handy. > > My idea is each site has an xml document exposed somewhere, called > searches.xml or similar: > > <searches> > <search> > <name>interesting</name> > <desc>This is interesting</desc> > <url>/searches/interesting.xml</url> > </search> > <search> > ... > </search> > </searches> > > Then there could be a site directory at dqsd.com that listed URLs to > search site directories in a similar way. That warrants for a great > installation UI... > > While on the subject of versioning... I thought I'd embed an optional > element in the search XML that defines a required DQSD version for the > search. It would ideally follow the version.xml pattern: > > <req_version> > <majorhi>3</majorhi> > <majorlo>1</majorlo> > <minorhi>6</minorhi> > <minorlo>0</minorlo> > </req_version> > > for easy validation. That way, we could fail installation of searches > that are written for a later version than what's installed on the client > machine. If no req_version element is available, we just let it through. > Does that sound like a good idea? > > Kim > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU > Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner. > Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission! > INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php > _______________________________________________ > DQSD-Devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dqsd-devel > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner. Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission! INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php _______________________________________________ DQSD-Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dqsd-devel
