On Mar 14, 2004, at 23:20, Ivo Köthnig wrote:
That was the only point in that cur_old where a
timestamp does not
match
with the inverse timestamp. I addionally checked if there is a
timestamp
which is older than the first one (200105xxxx). But there was none.
Okay, I've fixed it. Thanks for the notice!
There is another thing I do not understand. I assumed
that the
timestamps
should be sorted. Nearly that is true. But often there are some
timestamps
which are much smaller (more than month!) than the others around?
Whats the
reason for that?
Rows aren't necessarily inserted in chronological order, mainly for two
reasons: conversion from UseModWiki was alphabetical by page name (so a
page written later may be recorded before a page written earlier), and
data for articles which are deleted and subsequently undeleted are
re-inserted with new row id numbers.
Yes,
UseModWiki puts a "*" as the default comment in the edit form.
Could'n we change that? It should be easy to change all "*" appearing
before
the change to the new software. Or is there a good reason for don't
doing
that.
I can't think of any reason to change it. What's wrong with leaving
them as they are?
Since the username should be almost always the same
before the
conversion and
after it we could change each old id (set to zero know) to the new id
after the change to the new software. Since we should have a list of
all
user-ids and the coresponding user_names we could change all 0-id
before
convertion to the new id if the user_name matches?!
That could be done, yes.
[old_flags]
Ok, but it even contains 68 times "0" in the german old_cur and is
empty
in all others. Could that zeros be changed to ""?
There's no harm in the "0", it doesn't interfere with anything.
-- brion vibber (brion @
pobox.com)