Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Storage API 2.0 #22388

Closed
4 tasks
DeepDiver1975 opened this issue Feb 15, 2016 · 9 comments
Closed
4 tasks

Storage API 2.0 #22388

DeepDiver1975 opened this issue Feb 15, 2016 · 9 comments

Comments

@DeepDiver1975
Copy link
Member

DeepDiver1975 commented Feb 15, 2016

Remaining from #22069

  • remove duplicate implementations with respect to filemtime, filetype and stat
  • do we really need the hash() method? Can we drop it? => needed by documents
  • file_get_contents is duplicate with respect to the storage implementation - can we drop it?
  • define a proper search interface on storage api level

Further considerations:

  • split the storage api into two layers: the true storage api which implements a connection to a physical storage and on storage api which is basically the abstract API accessing any storage.

This goes into the direction of the original discussion with the adapter approach as far as I can tell

@DeepDiver1975 DeepDiver1975 added this to the 9.1-next milestone Feb 15, 2016
@MTRichards MTRichards modified the milestones: 9.2-next, 9.1-current Mar 25, 2016
@MTRichards
Copy link
Contributor

Conversational ok for 9.1, will consider it when we need to break the API anyway (versions for example) and also discuss with external parties.
Related: #12274 and #22330

All three could be combined into a storage API 3.0 if it makes sense.

@PVince81
Copy link
Contributor

oh, yet another "new storage API" ticket 😄

Which one is the main one ? @DeepDiver1975 @butonic

@PVince81
Copy link
Contributor

@PVince81
Copy link
Contributor

Long term I'd still vote for a full revamp for the storage API if possible, like the proposed interfaces from #20394

Then for the old storages if needed we can provide adapters that map the crappy PHP-like functions to the new interface.

@PVince81
Copy link
Contributor

PVince81 commented Apr 6, 2017

backlog for now.

@pmaier1

@PVince81
Copy link
Contributor

PVince81 commented Apr 6, 2017

@ownclouders
Copy link
Contributor

Hey, this issue has been closed because the label status/STALE is set and there were no updates for 7 days. Feel free to reopen this issue if you deem it appropriate.

(This is an automated comment from GitMate.io.)

@PVince81
Copy link
Contributor

@butonic can you post the result of our Nbg discussion about the storage API ?

@ownclouders
Copy link
Contributor

Hey, this issue has been closed because the label status/STALE is set and there were no updates for 7 days. Feel free to reopen this issue if you deem it appropriate.

(This is an automated comment from GitMate.io.)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants