Re: [Setup-tool-hackers] Archiver

[Hans Petter Jansson <hpj helixcode com>]

>> Originally, I'd hoped it could be like the other tools, e.g. a
>> backend/frontend/interface combination fitting neatly into the current
>> framework, with an XML configuration format. Obviously, since this is a
>> meta-tool, there would be some exceptions (notably more commandline options),
>> but I think it would work out nicely.
>> 
>> Does the archiver reside in $(PKG)/archiver/ and not in $(PKG)/src/archiver/
>> because this is deemed impossible? Could it be done? Right now it sticks out
>> a bit, at least in my mental model.

> I have had many of the same thoughts. There are some features of the
> archiver, such as adding backends to a location, that may indeed fall
> under that scheme. The basic tasks of storing configuration data and
> restoring such data to a backend does not fit in as well. Currently the
> archiver is structured as a library and includes all related
> functionality. In fact, it would not be difficult to build a backend
> around this library; helix-archiver is essentially just that. I have to
> think about this some more.

Maybe it can be done with two commandline tools; one that operates solely
through commandline arguments (good for post-install scripts), and one that
uses an XML configuration format. The latter would then be called
archive-conf (or some such thing), and would control as much as is possible
in this manner.

I'm not sure there is time, though. Better make the archiver fully
operational to front-end users first.


>> Lastly, how much work will it take to make it a completely usable part of the
>> HST package (I've read the TODO, but more detail on how it works with the
>> rest of the package would be nice)? What do we need to focus on, and who's
>> going to do this? I'm willing to look into it if it's not possible for
>> someone more qualified (i.e. Bradford), but I would need some help to do it
>> efficiently.

> We need to get the existing backends and capplets to archive their
> configurations in the archiver, and they must be listed in the
> default-user.xml and default-global.xml files. Also, the GUI needs a lot
> of work before it will be relatively usable. Aside from that, there are
> just a couple of small issues that need to be resolved.

I see two obvious ways the HST backends can be made to archive their
configurations.

1) Backends are run through the archiver. E.g. archiver <tool> <args>.

2) Archival is built into the backends' shared code, and it can be optionally
   disabled with a --no-archive switch.

I think I'm in favour of 2).

--
Hans Petter