[MTOS-dev] Implementing new MT::App::Search

[Byrne Reese]

As with many of these "frameworks" its really important that we start to
actually use it.

We are creating one implementation, but I want to invite anyone with their
own search implementations, Tim, Mark and David Raynes especially - to try
and use this new framework to create other implementations (e.g. Xsearch,
FastSearch and the Sphinx).

We need to think of Fumiaki's interpretation of Tim's Xsearch feature as a
starting point and it is not our job to expand it just enough to address any
existing use cases.

On 2/28/08 9:35 PM, "Fumiaki Yoshimatsu" <fyoshimatsu at sixapart.com> wrote:

> For those of you who read the document Tim has written a while ago on
> the wiki [1], and for those of you who are wondering how the new
> MT::App::Search relates to Tim's popular XSearch framework, let me
> explain the (planned) goal of the implementation for MT 4.2.
> 
> [1] http://wiki.movabletype.org/Proposal:XSearch
> 
> First of all, the new MT::App::Search is based on the idea of XSearch
> Tim proposed.  I just did not prepend the name with "X".
> MT::App::Search should be as extensible and as pluggable as Tim's
> XSearch framework is.
> 
> Second of all, the new MT::App::Search should be 100% backwards
> compatible with the current MT::App::Search.  The implementation I
> checked in leaves the entire code in MT::App::Search::Legacy class and
> you can always use it by just changing what application is bootstrapped
> in mt-search.cgi.  The new one should also leverage as many config
> directives as possible and should be able to use all of the search
> related template tegs.
> 
> Last but not the least, the new frameworks must be simple.  Because this
> is the first iteration, we are not yet 100% sure how search plugins
> would want to use the framework, I want the framework has as little
> "required to be implemented" items as possible.  In fact I am to change
> how search classes should implement search_terms method which returns
> "terms" and "args" to pass to load_iter method later, because it seems
> too restrictive.  I also want the framework leverage all the existing
> infrastructure such as MT::Template::Context class for modeling search
> results and existing template tags for user interface.
> 
> These are of course a source of discussion, not a concrete plan with
> deadline (well, I think I have deadline though).  So, as always, please
> share what you think.
> 
> Speaking of which, I also would like to know if it is OK to leave any of
> these features currently found in mt-search behind.  Is there that many
> use of the features?
> * Regexp search
> * Case sensitive search
> * NOT, AND and OR atoms
> 
> In other words, should whitespace separated search keywords be enough
> for blog readers?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Fumiaki Yoshimatsu
> Movable Type Engineering,
> Six Apart, K.K.
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mtos-dev-bounces at sixapart.com
>> [mailto:mtos-dev-bounces at sixapart.com] On Behalf Of Fumiaki Yoshimatsu
>> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 9:24 PM
>> To: MTOS dev
>> Subject: [MTOS-dev] Implementing new MT::App::Search
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MTOS-dev mailing list
> MTOS-dev at sixapart.com
> http://www.sixapart.com/mailman/listinfo/mtos-dev