Re: [phpslash-users] SQL db compatibility...

[Harry Z. <hz...@fi...>]

on 9/18/00 9:38 AM, nathan r. hruby at nh...@ar... wrote:

> Working together is fine, we are duplicating alot of work --it's silly and
> frustrates the hell out of me.

That's one of the reasons I'm trying to support a cross-platform db schema,
since at that level, most projects overlap greatly...
 
> - I don't think the two code bases (slash / nuke) are similar enough
> - php-nuke has already forked into two different projects (they're already
> forked, why merge now?)
> - phpslash development doesn't move very fast, that bothers alot of people.

You're right on all counts...

> Not to be pessimistic.. I'd be more than happy to look at the situation with
> the php-nuke (nucleus, etc..) people after 0.6 gets out the door.

That sounds great.
 
> I still think a  non-flexible LCD db schema is silly and impractical. A good
> cross-site content sharing engine is what's really called for.

Not to put you on the spot, but when I breached the subject of a
'conversion' utility a while back, I believe you pointed out (though I'm not
sure) that designikng and writing this would be a tremendous headache - yet
here you're advocating it?

Personally, I believe designing a compatible weblog db standard, with room
for extensions is a far better way to go:

* Instead of everyone having to contribute to new mods for the
conversion/sharing engine to accomodate each db, everyone works from the
same data structure, and can extend it with agreed upon mechanisms.

* Easier to maintain.

* Does not require everyone to change all their stuff continuously, once the
initial standard is agreed on.

All weblogs share the same structure, more or less - topics, authors,
comments, subjects, polls, etc...

Harry