[TYPO3-core] IRRE implementation bugs

[Kasper Skårhøj]

Hi Folks,

Attention Dmitry and Oliver Hader!
(And Dmitry, I'm going to expose some mistakes you have made, I don't  
intend that to offend you, so please don't be ;-)


I have largely been left out of the IRRE development but I have at  
various occasion looked at the implementation, especially related to  
workspaces, and shivered a bit because I felt something was wrong  
conceptually. I didn't actually look into these cases to understand  
them because I didn't have time. But for instance it's my impression  
that if you create a new version of an IRRE "parent" record that it  
automatically makes versions of the related records. This is not how  
versioning should work in TYPO3. A version is created with a single  
element, unless "page" or "branch" versioning are used. Letting an  
"element" version result in a chain of new versions under the hood is  
NOT warranted. On the TYPO3 core level IRRE is just a clever way  
interface wise to edit records which are "one object" seen with the  
users eyes. Inside TYPO3s core they are NOT one object and should be  
treated correspondingly as individual elements. If we wish to make  
them versioned all together we must invent a meta-concept for  
grouping versions somehow. This could be useful for other things too,  
for instance someone wanted a new element verison of a page to  
trigger element versions of all content elements on the page - well,  
ok, then but we must invent a new meta-concept for this. So far my  
concerns with IRRE in general, forgive me if I am not right about the  
implementation, after all I just concluded from the core.

Anyway, today I'm at Dassault and found that in a case where are  
least some IRRE related implementation made by Dmitry in revision  
2319 has broken the concept of foreign records. I experienced it like  
this and I think you can easily reproduce the problem:

Here is a FCE with Data Structure and TemplateObject:



As soon as I made a change in the workspace a new version was made of  
course BUT the Data Structure and Template Object selectors reported  
"Invalid value" and didn't list my DS and TO's. Why? Well, because  
Dmitry made a conceptually faulty change in revision 2319. This  
change is attached as a patch file and I intend to revert this unless  
someone can argue against it.

But of course let me comment on why this is wrong.


The problem is that if the master record (here my FCE) turns out to  
be a version in a workspace it will look up the list of foreign  
records completely differently. Lets recap how foreign records are  
normally looked up:

... (line 48 in patch):
WHERE' => 'pages.uid='.$foreign_table.'.pid
...

Of course we look them up as paired to a live page. (In fact we must  
NEVER select a version with pid=-1 without first selecting its live  
record!! Dmitry has confused this before in our debate on element/ 
page/branch versioning in may/june).

But if the master record is a version it will instead look it up like  
this:

... (line 75-76 in patch)
$foreign_table . '.pid=-1 AND ' .
$foreign_table . '.t3ver_wsid=' . $wsid .
...

Ergo, we select directly from offline records which is by definition  
forbidden. The right way is to first select the live record, then  
look for an overlay record.

I can't say exactly what the wanted effect for IRRE shoudl be but  
definitely this is wrong and gotta be a bug lots of people are having  
with workspaces now.



Conclusions:
- Remember, since August I'm the authority on versioning and  
workspaces and I must approve any non-trivial change to these parts.  
This is to avoid these situations because we have realized that the  
core team as a unit doesn't understand this technology well enough to  
maintain it error-free.
- Question: Are you sure IRRE is conceptually sound? Did any of my  
concerns ring true?
- Please make sure to cc me privately if you want to make sure I read  
core list mails ( I don't read the list regularly)
- I will revert this code issue




- kasper

-----------------------------------------------------
How many women does it take to get a baby in 1 month?

Kasper Skårhøj
Tryggevældevej 8
2720 Vanløse
+45 20 999 115
skype : kasperskaarhoej


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.netfielders.de/pipermail/typo3-team-core/attachments/20071015/6d351a32/attachment-0003.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pastedGraphic.tiff
Type: image/tiff
Size: 56610 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.netfielders.de/pipermail/typo3-team-core/attachments/20071015/6d351a32/attachment-0001.tiff 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.netfielders.de/pipermail/typo3-team-core/attachments/20071015/6d351a32/attachment-0004.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: revision2319.diff
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 4990 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.netfielders.de/pipermail/typo3-team-core/attachments/20071015/6d351a32/attachment-0001.obj 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.netfielders.de/pipermail/typo3-team-core/attachments/20071015/6d351a32/attachment-0005.htm