[bbDev] Pingbacks and the posts table

[fel64 at loinhead.net]

A post type column with additional data in usermeta sounds good. Can that
be attached to a fake user? I'm not sure if fake users are a good idea but
it would be good to make longer-term structural changes that accommodate
any future plans. Another sort of fake user could be Anonymous?

It would be annoying to add several columns to the table just in case
they're needed in a different type of post. That's exactly what usermeta
is for, right?

post_type also seems good because it could be a good way to implement
whispering in a similar way to how Vanilla does, which I'd be interested
in. Having private posts to someone in the middle of another topic sounds
a good system (private topics also possible) and that could work? Someone
else was also talking about making special topics editable by anyone,
which could benefit from this.

Where is that pagination stuff? It would be nice to get rid of post_order.
It's really not normal form and it makes a lot of operations like merging
or splitting a lot more complicated.

Felix

> any thoughts on post meta... wouldnt give us more flexbility on
> customizing
> posts and hacking it?
>
> On 7/19/07, Michael D Adams <mikea at turbonet.com> wrote:
>>
>> So I'm working on adding pingback functionality (both ways) to
>> bbPress and am running into a problem: how to store incoming pingbacks.
>>
>> WP stores pings in the comments table (sensibly) where there are
>> fields for the pinging page title and url (comment_author and
>> comment_author_url).
>>
>> The bbPress posts table doesn't have any such fields.  It seems we'd
>> need to add three fields to the posts table to make it work without a
>> bunch of ugly hacks:
>>
>> post_author:  the page title
>> post_external_url (or something): the page url
>> post_type (enum or varchar): post, ping
>>
>> While we're at it, it *might* be possible to get rid of the
>> post_position column which is almost completely redundant with
>> post_time as far as I can tell.  We use it for:
>>
>> 1. Grabbing first posts.  We can probably write a pretty efficient
>> query to do that without it.
>> 2. Some pagination stuff.  This is the sticky point.  I'm not sure we
>> can get around it easily, and if there's not a clever solution,
>> there's no point in axing it.
>>
>> Any thoughts on either or both issues?
>>
>> Michael
>> _______________________________________________
>> bbDev mailing list
>> bbDev at lists.bbpress.org
>> http://lists.bbpress.org/mailman/listinfo/bbdev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> drop by at http://www.adityanaik.com
> _______________________________________________
> bbDev mailing list
> bbDev at lists.bbpress.org
> http://lists.bbpress.org/mailman/listinfo/bbdev
>