Re: plans for reference management

On Sun, Apr 10, 2005 at 01:07:31AM +0200, Clemens Klein-Robbenhaar wrote:
> [...] LMS and CMFLinkChecker 
> 
> >>In order to avoid concurrent development on same features, I'd like to
> >>discuss this topic on the mailinglist first. So, what are your plans for
> >>the future of reference management?
>   Well, my plans are to try to get rid of the current, single point
> reference checking and more to get into the direction of reference management.
>   The first step would be to maintain all references in Silva content objects,
> instead of fetching them globally in each reference check.
>   Because updating the references each time someone edits a document seems
> a bit overkill to me I feel the step of approving a document (or some other
> versioned content) seems to be the right time to fetch the references
> contained in the approved version.
But it may be too late after publishing the document that an author is
informed about broken links. So, he has to alter and
publish the document again to fix the broken links. That are to steps to
get a document with correct links in it. But you're right, if the
document contains a vast amount of links, it'll be overkill...

>   This seems to require to add a hook to the versioning / workflow
>   machinery, however.  I am not sure what to do with non-versioned
>   content, especially containers.
Well, in the Plone world, the CMFLinkChecker retreives the links from
the document, after it's beeing saved. It passes these to the LMS, which
checks the links sequential.
 
>   After that step one could think of more features like updating references
> if e.g. an asset gets renamed, etc. I did not really get that far ;)
Well, sounds like a cool feature ...

>   As far as I understand Romans intention he wants to go into a different
> direction, e.g. improving the ability to check external links.
Okey, well yes, I never thought of developing a product which does
reference management. Just a product which checks internal and external
links like the CMFLinkChecker does. Sorry for the confusion ...

>   Roman: If we want to coordinate our work on improving the current
> SilvaReferenceChecker checker, how do we do that? I do not have the resources
> to set up a public CVS server or the like. I thought about an archive at
> SorceForge maybe, but the last time I asked on this mailinglist if
> other developers of Silva add-ons would be interested in having some
> "Silva common add-ons" repository there I got no response thus I did not
> tried that so far.
Well, such a "collective" sounds nice indeed. I think, I could use the
CVS server from gocept for such a product. If we have more extensions
for Silva and it makes sense to collect them in a sourceforge project
I'll go for it. Btw. we might think of using berlios.de - they offer a
SVN repository instead of CVS.

>   My current resources are about 4-8 hours per week; subtracting
> the time to read and answer my mail there is not much left. So I do
> expect to progress only slowly, most probaly getting the feature
> of the "reference catalog" implemented in the end of the summer.
Yes - as I said I'll work on such a product in spare time as well, which
is near 0 hours on some days. Therefore, I first want to check which
problems we might face if we're building such a product.

>   If You plan to proceed faster, especially if You think to overhaul
> the complete product anyway, please be so kind to let me know;
> I do not want to maintain a product which is rendered obsolete in
> the near future antway.
I don't think so for now. Although, maybe it would makes sense to create
a new product. I'm not sure ...

> Martijn Faassen replied:
> [...]
> >We'll be happy to support you in your effort and discuss issues on
> >the list. If you want to check in code, do please use a branch for
> >this. Try to keep the impact on Silva core code as minimal as
> >possible.
> 
> I am not certain what Roman's plans are, but so far I would like
> to keep the reference checking stuff into its own product. On some places
> especially in the UI integration I had hit some limits of that aproach, but
> nevertheless I would like not to touch Silva itself for now.
>   Maybe I will come up with some wish on the list later like "please
> make it possible to add a button here in the SMI" which we can discuss
> then ...
Yes, I think building a silva service is the better approach. Therefore
this product becomes optional, if someone don't want linkchecking he
don't need to install it.

> [...] Five
Keeping in mind, that the product should be build including Five.

Thanks :)
-- 
Roman Joost
www: http://www.romanofski.de
email: [email protected]

_______________________________________________
silva-dev mailing list
silva-dev-IAPFreCvJWM6s/[email protected]
http://lists.infrae.com/mailman/listinfo/silva-dev

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCWPR68CscaEkpx0IRApTdAJ92BMlms3g99BrvcFU40RoSrNE+kACeMpSR
h/DK+gOGtTAagrBU+X6i6Iw=
=Y8Qk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----