On 27 Mar 2008, at 23:28, Murray Altheim wrote:
Janne Jalkanen wrote:
The big question (for me anyway) is whether to implement this as
some
kind of actual hierarchical storage structure, or just via metadata.
I think that should be up to the repository; the only thing that
really matters is the reference scheme (and a perceived hierarchy
is as good as any, i.e. /a/b/c).
Uuh. I wish you hadn't said that. I think it should be up to the
design,
so that if someone changes a repository it wouldn't matter. One of the
things I think we should aim to permit in 3.0 is a similar variety of
storage provider possibilities. It's likely a big selling point.
Sorry, I don't understand. How would adding hierarchical pages (that
is, pages which are of the form a/b/c both in names and URLs) remove
the ability to pluginize our repository?
Also, ACL management will be a nightmare unless clear heritance rules
exist.
/Janne
