Dan,
Are there any changes you know of that need to be made to the Getting
Started with Base chapter for LO v3.5?
--Jean
Jean Weber wrote:
Dan,
Are there any changes you know of that need to be made to the Getting
Started with Base chapter for LO v3.5?--Jean
No. There has only been one change in Base in the past two years (maybe more), and that has already been addressed.
I would like to have many more changed needed, but that does not seem likely. Perhaps whoever is working on Base needs a reward system to improve Base to the quality it should have. Ah, I must be dreaming...
--Dan
Actually, that is a thought well worth pursuing, and there may be some possibilities. Nudge me now and then so I don't forget to follow up on some ideas.
Meanwhile, I will amend the copyright page and reissue GS with Base as a v3.5 chapter.
--Jean
Jean Weber wrote:
Jean Weber wrote:
Dan,
Are there any changes you know of that need to be made to the Getting
Started with Base chapter for LO v3.5?--Jean
No. There has only been one change in Base in the past two years (maybe more), and that has already been addressed.
I would like to have many more changed needed, but that does not seem likely. Perhaps whoever is working on Base needs a reward system to improve Base to the quality it should have. Ah, I must be dreaming...--Dan
Actually, that is a thought well worth pursuing, and there may be some possibilities. Nudge me now and then so I don't forget to follow up on some ideas.
Meanwhile, I will amend the copyright page and reissue GS with Base as a v3.5 chapter.
--Jean
Today, I filed a bug with LO. I want Base to be changed so that it is only a front end for HSQLDB which would continue to be the database engine (RDBMS) for LO. The database files (data, log, properties, and script) would be removed from the .odb file and written to a selected folder. This is what happens now if a person uses Base to connect to the latest version of HSQLDB. (Tools > Options > LibreOffice > Java > Class path has the location of the HSQLDB jar file.)
Very little code will be needed, and some of the code removed to do this.
--Dan
I think that that would be an extremely bad idea.
Why take something that's currently still really marginal and then
marginalise it even further?
Mark Stanton
One small step for mankind...
Mark Stanton wrote:
I think that that would be an extremely bad idea.
Why take something that's currently still really marginal and then
marginalise it even further?Mark Stanton
One small step for mankind...
Perhaps because it would not make it any worse than it is now. The changes I propose are to do what is already done when connecting to a database using HSQLDB 2.8: have the database files in a separate selected folder instead of the .odb file. Forms, queries, and reports would remain in it. Most of the necessary code already exists.
When creating a new database, a person would see very little difference from now. Create new database would be selected as now. An additional step having the person select the folder to keep the database files or create the folder. Then the third step would be the same: register the database, select the name for the .odb file, and where to save it. The .odb will contain the location of the database files as now.
It would require another wizard to convert the embedded databases to the new system. It would move the database folder of the .odb file to a selected location renaming the database folder to the person's choosing. The new location for the files would be written in the .odb files as is done presently when connecting to an external data source.
--Dan
Hi 
From what Andreas says the whole of Base would benefit hugely from being pruned right back to about OOo's 2.0 or earlier. Andreas' idea sounds too radical but i think Dan is onto something here.
Most of the problems seem to be about the embedded version of HSqlDb which is horribly ancient and apparently is anyway tweaked past breaking point. HSqlDb is one of the few things left that forces dependence on java.
Forcing people to use an external back-end would make Base far less like MS Access but it would cut right back on the problems people raise on the Users List with regards to Base.
I kinda agree with Mark, that it would further marginalise something that is already almost entirely unknown but i think it would be worth it, to get back to a good starting point that could be built from.
Regards from
Tom
The changes I propose are to do what is already done when connecting to a
database using HSQLDB 2.8: have the database files in a separate
selected folder instead of the .odb file. Forms, queries, and reports
would remain in it. Most of the necessary code already exists.
Ah, perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick then. If you mean simply
to exclude the "built in" HSQLDB option then I'm with you 100%. It sounded
like you wanted to exclude all options except HQSLDB, which is what I don't
think is a good idea.
Mark