Basic import+discussion

discussion moved to Upgrade Import

documented at import+not ready

  --John Abbe.....Sun Jan 23 00:14:33 -0800 2011

Was this done for a specific use? In other words, is someone using in on their Wagn?

Where are the tickets for this? Was this ever an Idea card?

  --Gerry Gleason.....2013-03-18 11:26:06 +0000

Oh, this is the ticket. Well, then I think we need more on this card to support it.

  --Gerry Gleason.....2013-03-18 11:27:47 +0000

I have used this, and have used it as a selling point to people who wanted to know if they could import existing data. I see that the URL to access it no longer works, but if the code is still around somewhere I imagine it's just a matter of coming up with a reasonable URL to access it and tweaking the code. How how long do you think it would take to do that, in case I run into a situation where I or a client want to use this feature? (By "you" I probably mean Ethan, since he's more familiar with this feature.)

  --John Abbe.....2013-03-18 16:18:00 +0000

In case it's not clear, this ticket is closed, the feature was implemented. Bug fixes and improvements got moved to upgrade import.

  --John Abbe.....2013-03-18 16:29:00 +0000

It may be implemented, but it isn't really documented (or supported), and the other card confuses several aspects of the issue. I won't pretend to know the right answer to improving things, but it is really hard to follow the design discussions about what we need/want.

I'm not sure that a ticket should be closed if it isn't "ready" yet.

  --Gerry Gleason.....2013-03-18 17:52:42 +0000

The ticket is ready, closed, done, complete. The +not ready goes on documentation cards, for documentation that is "not ready" to go public, i.e. features that we don't want a lot of people using so they won't get used to them and get frustrated when we change them (like this one), or which are probably beyond most Wagneers even and we don't want them muddying up the documentation (like all of the arcane views).

Maybe +not public would be better terminology.

  --John Abbe.....2013-03-18 22:29:47 +0000

We did have some import mechanism at some point, but afaict it's gone now. I think we should abandon this ticket, because it represents an obsolete approach.

  --Ethan McCutchen.....2013-03-20 02:30:06 +0000

actually, we have a current ticket: support simple import and export

  --Ethan McCutchen.....2013-03-20 02:32:55 +0000