My plan was to completely revise the User table to allow for multiple authenication types as well as supporting message signing (the precursor step to federation)
It will be difficult to preserve the tables (including the Users and the Messages) unless I plan to do so from the beginning. The cost is about 30% more work. On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Vassil Dichev <[email protected]> wrote: > > If I made breaking changes to the schema that ESME uses, how many of you > > will need a migration script from old to new? > > Merging the pools branch involved breaking DB changes as well and > AFAIK there were no complaints to Dick when he asked about nuking the > DB. > > The most valuable information to keep is messages, and they are > volatile info anyway- they're gone from the timeline when there are 40 > newer messages. I suspect that nobody will mind, especially if the > tradeoff is a particularly compelling new feature... which we are now > only guessing :) > > Vassil > -- Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp Git some: http://github.com/dpp
