[Phpmyadmin-devel] Export Only Triggers/Views/SPs

[Chanaka Dharmarathna]

On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Marc Delisle <marc at infomarc.info> wrote:

> 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.
>

Then shall we simply add 'Add CREATE TABLE statement' option to the Object
creation options, which is checked by default ?
I think this would be the simplest solution with our custom form.

-- 
Chanaka Dharmarathna
*http://chanakaindrajith.blogspot.com/*<http://chanakaindrajith.blogspot.com/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.phpmyadmin.net/pipermail/developers/attachments/20140203/e97c62aa/attachment.html>