Ultimately, Wagneers would like to be able to specify both a maximum number of cards for a search, and how many to return at a time. Currently, "limit" does the latter but people often expect it to mean the former.
Migrating may be tricky, so the earlier this is done the better. But it should be done with plenty of warning, i.e.:
- In an upcoming version of Wagn, make "paging" work just as "limit" does now. Deprecate the use of limit, letting people know that it will have a new meaning in a later version of Wagn. (this is duplicate limit functionality with paging)
- In the next (or some later) version of Wagn, change "limit" so that it specifies the total number of cards being returned. Do a migration that changes existing "limit" instuctions in WQL to "paging". Make sure the release notes mention this very prominently. (this is shift limit to mean total cards returned)
Related support tickets:Relevant user stories:add one
I don't really like the term "paging", as it seems more like a yes/no setting, and it might be narrower than what we want. other ideas:
- per_page
- sublimit
- batch
- batch_size
- serving
If we want to be done with this by Wagn 2.0, probably a good idea to do this first part pretty soon.
--John Abbe.....Mon Mar 07 16:06:56 -0800 2011
2.0 is pretty stacked. any reason to tackle this?
--Ethan McCutchen.....Mon Mar 07 16:38:17 -0800 2011
No more than many other things, imho. Just wanted to ping it.
--John Abbe.....Mon Mar 07 16:59:46 -0800 2011
the first part could be quick if we could settle the term. I think my favorite so far is "batch"
--Ethan McCutchen.....Fri May 27 21:13:26 -0700 2011
Notes
