I'll work on it tomorrow and check stuff in tomorrow afternoon PST. On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 2:18 AM, Richard Hirsch <[email protected]>wrote:
> @dpp: Did you want to check-in the new schema-related changes before I > deploy tomorrow? I didn't see any related commits? > > 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 > > > -- 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
