I like option 3 as well. Greetings, Lennard
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 06:50, Yuri Z <[email protected]> wrote: > Oops, I forgot to mention option 3 which is also preferred and the easiest > one: > Option 3: To remove the whole IndexWave and ConsoleClient related code > without fixing it. > The suggested patch is actually related to the option 3, not to the option > 2. > > 2011/8/21 Yuri Z <[email protected]> > > > Hello > > The WIAB code currently contains a lot of deprecated and broken code: the > > IndexWave functionality in Web client was replaced by an RPC calls to a > > search service. The change was also dictated by the need to get rid of > > legacy client-server protocol on one hand, and to replace the IndexWave > with > > more advanced search functionality for the Web client on the other hand. > > Long story short the IndexWave code makes it almost impossible to > > re-structure the WIAB code for improved persistence, reduced memory > > footprint and improved/indexed search functionality. So, it's only > logical > > to clean up the code and remove all IndexWave related classes. However, > the > > ConsoleClient (which AFAIK is currently broken anyway) still uses > IndexWave, > > so it means that the ConsoleClient should be removed along with > IndexWave. > > The alternatives are: > > 1. To comment out all IndexWave related code that interferes with efforts > > to improve the WIAB and leave the broken code in the repository. > > 2. To remove the IndexWave related and fix the ConsoleClient to work with > > new search functionality (which would also include future efforts to keep > it > > up to date as the WIAB code evolves). > > > > Taking in account the current scarcity of resources in the WIAB project, > it > > seems like the option 2 is unrealistic, so IMHO, we should focus on the > Web > > Client and remove the obsolete/broken code. > > The patch for the suggested change can be found at: > > http://codereview.waveprotocol.org/613001 > > > > Comments/suggestions are welcome. > > Yuri > > > > > > >
