Re: gallery ordering issue
Chuck Hagenbuch <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.horde.ansel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Quoting "Heath S. Hendrickson" <[email protected]>: > Is there any good reason that DataTree was written to use only a single > (okay, so it's really two) table as opposed to using dedicated tables > for each application that uses the driver? Heck if I know what *you* consider a good reason, but: ease of use, simplicity, ease of initial coding. You should go through the commit history for DataTree at some point. It has evolved *tremendously* over time, always moving towards being both faster and more flexible. And if you looked at horde/docs/TODO, you'd see an entry for making it possible to use a different set of tables instead of the group_uid field. > This way you can keep the Ansel code a little > more standard and you don't have lots of workarounds in the code (and it > makes it easier to update DataTree if you don't have to keep in mind the > customizations of Ansel). What workarounds do you think in Ansel? What in Ansel keeps us from updating DataTree code aside from the standard backwards-compatibility concerns? I don't see any of this. -chuck -- "Regard my poor demoralized mule!" - Juan Valdez -- ansel mailing list - Join the hunt: http://horde.org/bounties/#ansel Frequently Asked Questions: http://horde.org/faq/ To unsubscribe, mail: [email protected]