Forum OpenACS Development: Re: General Comments package update plans

Collapse
Posted by tammy m on
Dave,

Sounds good.

Just for your consideration...

When I wanted to get General Comments into Search results... I started wondering if we need to use CR for General Comments at all? It doesn't seem like versioning (or specifying relationships to subdocuments; or defining content types; or adding custom attributes) is important for General Comments so the overhead of CR might not be beneficial.

And it might be more practical to implement search on General Comments by just using existing search on Static Pages. The Static Pages package would have to be changed slightly to simply "display" comments along with the page as it's stuffed into the database. This would have the side benefit of not having duplicate links show up in Search results for the General Comment and the associated Static Page (as happens in Forums now).

Collapse
Posted by Bart Teeuwisse on
Dave,

Tammy raises a good point with respect the versioning of comments. However, one could still use the CR even without versioning. Instead of creating a new cr_revision with each modification, one would reuse the same revision.

This way the CR continues to be the standard method of storing information and no modifications to the OpenFTS search are required.

/Bart

Collapse
Posted by Malte Sussdorff on
What is so bad about storing versions of general comments. If you are concerned about performance due to large tables due to revisions, wouldn't it make more sense to think about a "current" cr_items table and an "archived" cr_items table.