Re: persistent chat logs

[Jonathan Blandford <jrb redhat com>]

Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com> writes:

> I see that walters had some problems persisting chat logs. One issue is
> the the multiple discussions problem (have we decided if we want this?).
> Another is the reference to person and the fact that chat lines can
> change.
> 
> Actually, re chat line changes. Do we want such changes logged? What if
> a chat line changes some time after the comment was closed? That means
> the log changes, and the log now isn't strictly a log of what happened
> at the time of the discussion.

I don't think we want to log chat changes.  We should just make a copy
of the chat and store that.

> As things are looking, it seems we're on track to making every object
> persistent. I'm not sure we really want that, it makes things much more
> heavyweight and complicated, especially for things like the chat. Also,
> some things truly are transient (like LiveComments).
> 
> I think we want to keep the idea that the discussion is transient and
> active, but then things get archived in a more finalised fashion. We
> don't want to store half-finished comments, nor do we want to store
> half-finished drawings.
> 
> So, maybe we want something like this:
> 
> When you post a whiteboard into the chat this is a form of closing. It
> creates a persistent whiteboard. This whiteboard object doesn't have a
> version field or anything that lets you edit it. Its just the raw data
> for the image. This object is persisted in the database, and the chat
> log can reference it.
> 
> Similarly chat logs don't have to reference the active chat lines that
> are in the currently happening chat. Instead they are archived copies of
> that log.

Sounds right.

-Jonathan