Le 2014-02-02 22:20, Chanaka Dharmarathna a écrit :

>
>
>     >     Chanaka Dharmarathna a écrit :
>     >     > Hi,
>     >     >
>     >     > I'm trying to support the feature request [0]. With that we need
>     >     to think
>     >     > about export just triggers, just views, just stored
>     >     > procedures/functions/events etc. I think this would be
>     practically
>     >     needful.
>     >     > Anyway, I'm not sure about how we could support this with
>     the current
>     >     > custom export form. By adding new radio button
>     (views/triggers/SPs) to
>     >     > 'Format-specific options' parallel to structure, data, structure
>     >     and data
>     >     > options ? Appreciate your thoughts on this.
>     >     >
>     >     > [0] : http://sourceforge.net/p/phpmyadmin/feature-requests/1403/
>     >
>     >     Hi Chanaka,
>     >     you probably meant checkboxes instead of radio buttons, so
>     that a user
>     >     can choose a combination of export sections.
>     >
>     >     I think that these should be placed under "object creation
>     options" and
>     >     "data creation options". Note that you'll need more checkboxes
>     than you
>     >     mention, because, to implement this request, a user would want to
>     >     disable the normal definition statements likre CREATE TABLE, ALTER
>     >     TABLE, etc.
>     >
>     >
>     > Hi Marc,
>     >
>     > I include my suggestions to the custom export form UI [0] using fire
>     > bug. I added two elements to the custom export form.
>     > 1. The radio button 'only view/trigger/SP' to the 'Format-specific
>     options'
>     > 2. The check box 'Add CREATE VIEW statement to the 'Object
>     creation options'
>     >
>     > We'll look at how this is going to work.
>     >
>     > Item 2 will provide an option to the user, whether to include the view
>     > for his export. Basically this will decouple views and tables.
>     This will
>     > make as a different feature request.
>     >
>     > After item 2 is implemented, user can do export with/without
>     > view/sp/trigger. But always export will include at least database
>     structure.
>     >
>     > So item 1 will provide an option to not to include database
>     structure to
>     > the export. With this option we can hide some options like '|CREATE
>     > TABLE| options' in 'Object creation options' section which we
>     don't need.
>     >
>     > What do you think on this ?
>     >
>     > [0] : http://i.imgur.com/Ri7m4O5.png
>
>     Hi Chanaka,
>     In our current form, we have clear choices: structure, data, structure
>     and data (could be improved with just two checkboxes, one for structure
>     and one for data, but this is another subject).
>
>     What I find confusing is that you are adding near these choices, another
>     choice which is (I think) a subset of the structure.
>
>     I would classify a trigger as being part of the structure (it's more
>     related to structure that to data, right?)
>
>
> Hi Marc,
>
> Yes I agree to your point. In that case, the only problem we have is,
> there is no way to ignore table structure of the database, if we chose
> 'structure' or 'structure and data'. For that we should have an option
> like 'Ignore table structure' under 'Object creation options'. What do
> you think ?
>

I believe it would be clearer if we express every option in a positive
way. So, a checkbox for all elements on which we can choose, the table
structure being one of them. Plus a default value for all these
checkboxes, based on the expected need of the majority of users.