<html> <head> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"> </head> <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> There has been discussion on IRC about a matter related to versioned repositories that needs to be broadened. It dealt with situations whereby a new repository version exists in the DB in an incomplete state. The incomplete state exists because conceptually a repository version includes both the version record itself and all of the DB records that associate content. For several reasons, the entire version cannot be constructed in the DB in a single DB transaction. The problem of Incomplete State is not unique to repository versions. It applies to publications as well. I would like to discuss and decide on a standard approach to resolving this throughout the data model. The IRC discussion (as related to me) suggested we use a common approach of having a field in the DB that indicates this state. This seems reasonable to me. As noted, it's a common approach. Thoughts? Assume we did use a field, let's discuss name. It's my understanding that a field named is_visible or just visible was discussed. I would argue two things. 1) the is_ prefix is redundant to the fact it's a boolean field and we have not used this convention anywhere else in the model. 2) Historically, the term "visible" has strong ties to user interfaces and is used to mask fields or records from being displayed to users. I propose we use a more appropriate field name. Perhaps "valid". Thoughts? </body> </html>