nenad-vujicic left a comment (openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website#5815)
> I'm not sure if this should be part of this PR—maybe we should address the
> issue in another PR.
>
Well, I think it's same if we do this now or in next PR (but really next),
because we cannot delay this because next steps will be:
- Create versions on `reopen` / `close` (where we'll have to set
`note_version.note_comment_id` to `note_comment.id` which is created on new
action)
- Generate note versions from `note_comments` (where we'll copy
`note_comment.id` to `note_versions.note_comment_id` for every generated note
version)
- Now we'll be able to do in parallel adding note tags and removing special
note comments.
> Se also the last paragraph of [#5294
> (comment)](https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/5294#issuecomment-2541604426),
> where I write about keeping `id` from api0.6-comments. Some of those
> api0.6-comments will become non-comments and will be deleted from the
> comments table. In this case their ids are lost. If we are to use them for
> sorting, we don't need exactly the same ids, anything that forms the same
> sequence will do.
>
@AntonKhorev thanks for this idea! I've just added new column `note_comment_id`
and index on it. I'm only not sure about the new column name (perhaps more
natural name would be `ordering_id` or similar? after removing note comments)
and if index should be composite (I still don't have in my head all situations
in which new column will be used and how).
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/5815#issuecomment-2766013524
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID:
<openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/5815/c2766013...@github.com>
_______________________________________________
rails-dev mailing list
rails-dev@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/rails-dev
