On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 at 16:00:50, Dave Reisner wrote:
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 03:52:09PM +0100, Lukas Fleischer wrote: [...]
That sounds like an even better idea. So we're making the package pages look like the archweb package pages, with PKGBUILD and tarball links. But do we include comments etc. from the pkgbase there as well? Or rather have the actions and comments on the pkgbase pages only?
If comments, etc. will be shared amongst all output packages, then it makes sense, to me, to also load them on the pkgbase page.
And when searching, we only return package pages?
Agreed.
So the plan is: * Create a "PackageBases" table with a "Name" column and transfer the following fields from the "Packages" table: - CategoryID (?) - NumVotes - OutOfDateTS - SubmittedTS - ModifiedTS - SubmitterUID - MaintainerUID * Change the foreign key references in PackageVotes, PackageComments and CommentNotify. * Write a migration script that converts the tables accordingly. We probably want to use the package name as pkgbase name for existing packages. * Adjust the package submission script: Create pkgbase and packages on submission (check all packages for conflicts with existing ones, filter all packages using the blacklist, etc.!) * Redesign the UI: Add pkgbase pages that contain links to all packages belonging to the pkgbase and also provide package actions and comments/votes (do we want to add these to non-split packages as well?) The package pages contain links to the corresponding pkgbase pages as well. * Adjust the RPC interface and add missing features/information. Did I miss anything?