@David: Change away. No need for a migration script in my opinion. I'll just delete the DB on stax and recreate it. That is no problem. Much more impt are the diff authentication types.
D. On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 11:00 PM, David Pollak<[email protected]> wrote: > 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 >
