Hugo,
The benefit is that there does not need to be a manual step. If the
software can do the job, then why ask a person to do it?
Fields/forms have internal IDs that are the root of their
function/definition. But these values are not GGUID. They are
localized to the ARS server. ( And their usefulness is limited by that
choice.) If an object is "owned" by a vendor, then the customer should
only "push it aside" and implement their own object in it's place. If
that can be done in a way that allows for the new object to be
protected from the vendors patch/installer and allows the
patch/installer to find the vendor's object, then that is what I am
after. And the less I have to do to make all of that happen the
better.
Furthermore, why does the name actually matter to the function of the object?
The only places that I see names as being more useful than GGUIDs
would be to allow the customer to "replace" an OOB part with a custom
part. Form views and maybe guide names come to mind as the only "good
things" that I can think of like that. Sure you could argue that
Guides contents should be object name based and not GGUID based, but I
think you would be "working to hard" to keep the functionality correct
in that case. But having the ability to rename(enable/disable) a guide
and sub in your own (based on name) might be a very good choice for a
customization design pattern for those objects too.
--
Carey Matthew Black
Remedy Skilled Professional (RSP)
ARS = Action Request System(Remedy)
Love, then teach
Solution = People + Process + Tools
Fast, Accurate, Cheap.... Pick two.
On 8/15/07, Hugo Visser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ** My bet is that AR Developer Studio will be built on Eclipse and therefore
> it will be much easier to integrate with VCS's like CVS and SVN that already
> have a team provider in Eclipse. I'm not sure how the copy-merge model of
> CVS and SVN are a good fit when it comes to AR development however.
>
> I understand the guid thing now, but I don't see the benifit. If you are
> renaming stuff on the server and you are writing a patch instruction, I'd
> rather have an explicit "rename" step as opposed to "import this and it will
> automatically rename things" step. But maybe my view is different as my
> company is supplying patches to our customers for ExpertDesk today.
>
> Hugo
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the
Answers Are"
