On ons, 2005-11-23 at 22:31 +0000, Jon Wilkins wrote: > I do think that the planner db functionality should support the database > being a central database of more than one project. By doing this, the > dbms can become the centre of a very useful tool for monitoring entire > groups of project, collecting metrics and all sorts. > > At some distant point down the road, I think it would be good for > planner to default to connecting to the dbms resource and presenting a > list of current projects to open... > ... though the Planner Community must'n forsake file-based project files > > I did some work a way back to try to get planner working with Mysql -- I > didn't get a lot further than getting planner to create the table > structure, but you're welcome to that work if you can use it. > > This is another good point -- Any revamp of the planner db should make > it play well with dbms other than postgresql (mysql especially - but > once the code can accomodate more than one dbms it will probably be able > to support multiple others). I seem to remember that the db code for > actually accessing the project data (in libplanner?) is highly dependant > on postgresql's cursors - which mysql does not support. Yeah, I saw the sql code in libplanner. I haven't examined the file format yet, but (imho) if it isn't easily adaptable to sql95, the format should be changed. Another solution could be to drop the xml-format in favor of sqlite as the default for file based saving. -- Kristian Berg
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part