Comment 5 for bug 744888

11:34 < _mup_> Bug #744888: Muting bug 1 times out <bad-commit-12754> <story-better-bug-notification> <timeout> <Launchpad itself:Triaged> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/744888 >
11:35 < sinzui> lifeless: I thought Snapshot was taught to always ignore collection fields
11:36 < lifeless> sinzui: Thus I'm asking you :)
11:36 < sinzui> ah, but bugs and questions want to snapshot for the last message I think. Maybe it was not done
11:37 < lifeless> a collection snapshot could just record the tip message (for some apporpriate order)
11:37 < lifeless> and the delta is 'messages newer than X'
11:37 < lifeless> [e.g. see my batch navigator work]

11:50 < lifeless> sinzui: ok so we faded out there
11:50 < lifeless> sinzui: is my suggestion a) broken, b) sensible, c) we need to modify how snapshotting deals with collections ?
11:51 < lifeless> sinzui: or d) none of the above
11:52 < sinzui> lifeless: sorry. I very distracted. IAre we certain that is needed? was it cargo culted from old code?
11:53 < sinzui> as for bug and questions looking at messages, I think that is lazy design. I believe there are two emitters of the modifications and they know if a message was appended
11:53 < lifeless> sinzui: bug one has several thousand messages
11:54 < lifeless> sinzui: I'm certain we either need to not snapshot it, or snapshot it much more efficiently
11:54 < lifeless> sinzui: *and* I'm certain that what is snapshotted internally shouldn't match the API attributes for this object either, as the API has different needs vs in-appserver deltas.
11:55 < sinzui> So the publisher emitting the event should be clear what message was added instead of letting the subscriber guess. I do not think snapshot should be working with deap data
11:55 < sinzui> deep
11:56 < lifeless> sinzui: ok, cool.
11:56 < lifeless> so we doNotSnapshot it, see what breaks, fix the signal to contain the new message if needed
11:57 < sinzui> yep