Port to GITHUB!!!

[GoogleCodeExporter]

That way development can continue and the project may LIVE AGAIN!

Of course, I could do this myself, but I figured I'd suggest it to you first.

Github uses git (which is just plane awesome in every way), but more 
importantly encourages forking and contributing so that projects don't grow 
stagnant due to lack of owner contributions!

Maybe I'll port it over and put together some of the patches in the open bug 
tickets...

Original issue reported on code.google.com by deansofer on 31 May 2011 at 10:31

[GoogleCodeExporter]

And you know since I'm jotting down my notes, maybe I'll take a look at how 
much would be involved in re-implementing in jquery.

Original comment by deansofer on 31 May 2011 at 10:36

[GoogleCodeExporter]

People wishing to contribute just normally send a patch. If there *is* a 
will+skill to do so, this code repository is completely sufficient :)

I may eventually migrate to Mercurial hosting here on Google code (which allows 
forking as well), but only if there are enough requests to do so.

Original comment by ondrej.zara on 31 May 2011 at 8:37

[GoogleCodeExporter]

As for the jQuery reimplementation - are there any true advantages of doing so? 
Using jQuery just means that every script kiddie without deeper JS knowledge 
will feel more competent when looking at the code. I am not sure I want that :)

Original comment by ondrej.zara on 31 May 2011 at 8:40

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hah, I was just wondering if it would 1: condense the code at all and 2: 
empower more user contribution.

Script kiddies asside, any helpful patches are good patches. Especially since 
your oz repo has a big message on it saying "You probably won't know how to use 
this thing", which I think goes beyond a concern with script kiddies.

Anyway, when I was thinking about it one of the things I was wondering is maybe 
(if we really wanted to optimize) we should be looking at canvas and skip 
jquery altogether. However I think it may become more tedious just having to 
build an interactive gui for canvas rather than working with simple html 
elements.

Original comment by deansofer on 31 May 2011 at 11:39

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Yeah, oz.js is not well documented. OTOH, it is only kB uncompressed - and most 
of that are ECMA Array prototypes for older browsers.

Incidentaly, I was also thinking about switching the rendering backend 
completely to canvas, now when IE9 also supports this API. This would 
automatically solve the "print / save as image" issue, for instance...

However, rendering into a canvas of this size does not seem to be feasible, 
from the performance point of view. Maintaining a canvas of 2000x2000 pixels 
and re-rendering it each time a table is moved, hm, I guess that would kill a 
browser. Or maybe I am mistaken? Some measurements must be made here...

Original comment by ondrej.zara on 1 Jun 2011 at 6:03

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I sorta dropped the thoughts about jquery for now. However, I don't think you 
should bother supporting printing/saving because people can use simple 
screenshot plugins. Frankly, you'd be just as well off searching for a js 
snippet someone made completely self-contained for taking screenshots or 
printing. For that very reason, it's less within the scope of critical issues 
(IMHO).

Original comment by deansofer on 1 Jun 2011 at 6:07

[GoogleCodeExporter]

You still should port to Github (or switch to mercurial I guess? never used it 
before). Either that or finally get around to merging in some of the patches 
floating around :)

Original comment by deansofer on 1 Jun 2011 at 6:07

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Which patches? I am not fully aware of any pending patches out there...

Original comment by ondrej.zara on 1 Jun 2011 at 7:46

[GoogleCodeExporter]

http://code.google.com/p/wwwsqldesigner/issues/detail?id=60#c9

http://code.google.com/p/wwwsqldesigner/issues/detail?id=45#c3

These were the only 2 I found, although looking through all the issues, a few 
of em seem like duplicates you could probably close or offer a 'defacto' 
solution (such as printing). I wouldn't keep suggesting phantom though, I would 
just compile a list of screenshot tools/plugins

Original comment by deansofer on 1 Jun 2011 at 9:21

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Successfully migrated to Mercurial. People can fork this now :)

Original comment by ondrej.zara on 20 Jun 2011 at 6:09

• Changed state: Fixed