Re: [teiid-designer-dev] [teiid-dev] vdb.xml improvements

----- Original Message ----- I can see that viewpoint, but my thought is that we're making the vdb.xml a somewhat more visible artifact with product support for dynamic vdbs. Any steps toward easy of use / consistency would seem to help over the long run of the remaining 8.x line. In a ddl only world all of our constructs need converted. CREATE FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER replaces translator declarations, GRANT statements for the permissions/roles, CREATE SCHEMA, etc. The question is to what degree does supporting xml declarations make our/Designer's life easier in the short/long run. Keeping the xml mostly saves us from writing more parsing hooks and until we allow these operations at runtime having a statement based mechansim for declaration is just a nice to have. So the question for the rest of 8.x is what if anything would be nice to declare in DDL rather than or in addition to xml? On getting the DDL footprint down options include: - Keeping the zip concept and allowing the vdb.xml to reference a .ddl file in the vdb artifact - In theory this would be implemented through the use of a built-in metadata repository - begin work on the notion of a "live" modeshape metadata repository (this is mostly a separable effort) - introduce notion of a deployable schema / .ddl artifact that can be referenced by the vdb.xml (this doesn't seem like the right approach). Any other thoughts?