On Wed, 2005-08-17 at 14:36 +0200, Grobian wrote:
>  From a database point of view, it is evil to duplicate values in an 
> automated manner, just use a foreign key for such purposes.  In other 
> words, avoid duplication.  If such bash function is a common tool then 
> -- apart from wondering why it isn't part of the default suite -- this 
> anti-duplication constraint is being broken massively.  I like Mike's 
> idea, because it deals with data redundancy and basically uses this 
> 'foreign key' for the changelog.

A ChangeLog is not a database - nor is a CVS commit log.

> In other words: centralise the administration, don't make yourself 
> having to keep multiple copies up-to-date, you're doomed to make errors 
> with that.

You can not keep CVS commit logs up-to-date, since you can not change a
given entry.

./Brix
-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to