Quoting Martijn van Oosterhout (kleptog@gmail.com): > We're severals years on and it looks like the "DDTP/DDTSS will > eventually be replaced by Pootle" is as far away as it ever was. In It is, I'm afraid, yes. > the meantime the current system, while it works, is not ideal. It runs > on a Berkeley DB version 1 DB which has suffered some damage in the > past and now contains rubbish here and there. Also there have been > very few contributions. So I have some ideas about the future: > > 1. Switch the backend from BDB1 to the postgresql instance on the > machine. I've actually prototyped this and it appears to work. I just > put a shim BDB interface on a table in the postgres database. It's > ugly and evil, but it would solve the data corruption/list issues. It > would probably then get appropriately backed up. Performance won't be > great but I doubt it's any worse than what is there now. > > Unless there are objections I want to try doing this in the weekend. You get a +1 from me. If that makes your work easier, I can give you sudo access on churro so that you can shutdown the web server as you want, to avoid interference by DDTP users....or add whatever package you might need. > 2. Long term it would be good if there were more people who could work > on the system. I have the feeling that the current codebase, being > essentially Perl with not very good abstractions reduces the number of > potential contributors. If I were to do it again today I'd build it in > Python using Django. My feeling is that this would make it more > accessible for new people. Does anybody have any ideas about that? I think you got a few answers already which might give good hope for this. You already know that *I* can't do much in that regard except trying to keep some understanding of how things work...and keep an eye on things that happen on the server.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature