On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Nate Finch <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't see how having different identical structs that are updated > simultaneously in any way prevents any problems with compatibility.
If we're updating those structs simultaneously, we're completely missing the point. Once we've defined a pure-data struct that might be persisted or sent over the wire we *must not change that struct* -- if we want to send or store different data, we need a new struct. > Maybe I'm missing something from the proposal, but it seems like this just > adds busywork without actually solving any problems that weren't caused by > incorrect use of the code in the first place. Isn't that tautological? AFAICS, storing a charm.Meta (or a params.anything) directly in the DB *is* incorrect use of the code, but nobody realises that until it's too late: that is the problem, and that's what we're addressing. > Separation of logic is absolutely a good thing. Separation of data is not > nearly so useful. It's harder than you might think to separate the data from the logic that acts on it ;). Cheers William -- Juju-dev mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
