On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 12:39:32PM -0600, Peter Harpending wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 02:23:01PM -0400, Stephen Michel wrote:
> > I don't understand exactly why it's a corner case. Under the current system,
> > wouldn't /p/snowdrift/ eventually be coded the exact same way as any other
> > project, so new projects would be prevented from using `snowdrift` as a slug
> > in the same way that they'd be prevented from taking the slug of any other
> > existing project?
> N.B. I'm using the coqdoc convention of putting code in [square braces].
> No. As it's implemented now,[SnowdriftProject] is in its own data type, 
> defined
> in config/models.

No it isn't. :)

There is now no SnowdriftProject type, nor should there ever be.

Stephen is right; this is not an issue yet. The "/p/snowdrift" route
will go away, replaced by "/p/#ProjectSlug", and the snowdrift project
will be the obvious owner of the ProjectSlug that corresponds to the
route "/p/snowdrift".

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Dev mailing list

Reply via email to