Portmill status

[Jordan K. Hubbard]

On Jun 29, 2009, at 10:52 AM, William Siegrist wrote:

> On Jun 29, 2009, at 10:29 AM, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 29, 2009, at 8:34 AM, William Siegrist wrote:
>>
>>> But "best tool" here needs to take into consideration the other  
>>> MacPorts web apps. Right now, MPWA and the website use MySQL. It  
>>> would help share data in the long run if all systems pulled from  
>>> the same database. I don't think its worth the effort to integrate  
>>> the Postgres DB that backs Trac, but we can at least try to make  
>>> MPWA, Portmill, and the website share some common data. That of  
>>> course means the other apps could be ported to CouchDB if thats a  
>>> better tool overall.
>>
>> I think this ultimately needs to be left to the discretion of  
>> whomever's doing the work.  I mean, it's all well and good to say  
>> "this should really use MYSQL instead!" but unless the person  
>> saying this is also turning up to the discussion with a pile of  
>> patches which Make It So, it can only come across as carping from  
>> the back seat.
>
>
> I'm not saying they should all use MySQL, I'm saying they should all  
> use the same backend. My primary reason is I believe it is better  
> engineering. But secondarily, I'm the one who has to manage yet- 
> another-database-server if we add CouchDB to the mix. So I'm not  
> just sitting in the backseat.

I think you missed my fundamental point.   What we need to be focusing  
on is just who is going to take over the work now that the original  
author is going offline for an extended period and who, if anyone,  
will be actually making the changes to align on a common back-end.  If  
no one picks the ball up and actually carries it, the broader issues  
of support for it are rather academic at best.

- Jordan