Moving out legacy schemas into their own folder

[aasimkhan30]

Moving legacy schemas into their own folder in OE.
The list of legacy schemas was obtained from: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/relational-databases/security/authentication-access/ownership-and-user-schema-separation?view=sql-server-ver16#built-in-schemas-for-backward-compatibility

[alanrenmsft]

where is the requirement coming from? is it appropriate to call them "legacy"?

[aasimkhan30]

@alanrenmsft, drew had mentioned about it here. microsoft/vscode-mssql#17543 (comment)

[lewis-sanchez]

Is there a way to assemble the list of filters outside the getter and just return it immediately without needing to assemble every time?

[Charles-Gagnon]

I would go with his suggestion of just putting them at the end instead of in a separate folder to start with then, unless we get specific feedback that people want those hidden.

The term "legacy" is definitely questionable and would be something we'd want to run by the engine owners first I'd think to make sure they're ok with the term. So for now just moving them to the end is likely fine for our purposes.

[Charles-Gagnon]

@dzsquared Thoughts on this?

[lewis-sanchez]

Formatting looks odd.

[dzsquared]

"Built-in schemas" instead of legacy schemas, matches the docs
I'm ok with them going into a folder or at the end - @erinstellato-ms

[Charles-Gagnon]

Wouldn't built-in then also want to include system schemas like dbo?

Which could be a consideration. Although I think if we're doing this it would be worth seeing about having a different folder icon (folder with schema icon as a badge?) - right now it blends in too well with the other folders IMO.

[aasimkhan30]

Wouldn't built-in then also want to include system schemas like dbo?

Which could be a consideration. Although I think if we're doing this it would be worth seeing about having a different folder icon (folder with schema icon as a badge?) - right now it blends in too well with the other folders IMO.

@Charles-Gagnon , that's why I did not use 'System schemas' because that would also include dbo, sys, information schema.

[aasimkhan30]

Should I use a neutral term like 'Other schemas'? Putting them towards the end would be a lot of work since our code does not support sorting OE elements as of now. @Charles-Gagnon and @dzsquared

[erinstellato-ms]

We can either put these schemas in their own folder, or hide them altogether. It's on my list to collect feedback about it from users, but official guidance from MS says to not put any objects in these schemas (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/relational-databases/security/authentication-access/ownership-and-user-schema-separation?view=sql-server-ver16#built-in-schemas-for-backward-compatibility). In fact, I've already had a MS PM message me about showing these schemas (and says we should not).

A reasonable compromise, to start, is to have them in their own folder. Then we'll see what feedback we get. I think either Legacy Schemas or Built-In Schemas is fine (I prefer legacy, but I completely get @dzsquared's point about the documentation using Built-It).

The dbo schema should NOT be in there. It is the default schema where objects are created and must be visible.

[dzsquared]

We can either put these schemas in their own folder, or hide them altogether. It's on my list to collect feedback about it from users, but official guidance from MS says to not put any objects in these schemas (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/relational-databases/security/authentication-access/ownership-and-user-schema-separation?view=sql-server-ver16#built-in-schemas-for-backward-compatibility). In fact, I've already had a MS PM message me about showing these schemas (and says we should not).

A reasonable compromise, to start, is to have them in their own folder. Then we'll see what feedback we get. I think either Legacy Schemas or Built-In Schemas is fine (I prefer legacy, but I completely get @dzsquared's point about the documentation using Built-It).

The dbo schema should NOT be in there. It is the default schema where objects are created and must be visible.

if @erinstellato-ms says Legacy, then we go with Legacy. "Not recommended for your health and wellbeing" doesn't reasonably fit.

[erinstellato-ms]

@dzsquared you're funny :) I'm really good with either legacy or built-in. Both are appropriate (and yes, something like "do not use these" is too long!)

[kburtram]

Looks good. Agree there is probably a better name than legacy, but the change its self is fine.