On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Francis J. Lacoste <[email protected]> wrote: > On November 19, 2009, Michael Hudson wrote: >> > * finding all of the recipes that are associated with a given source >> > package * finding all of the recipes that are associated with a given >> > branch * linking to past builds of recipes >> > * creating recipes for things (esp. SPNs) that don't exist yet. >> > >> > There are many traversal paths that satisfy all of these constraints. >> > https://launchpad.net/+recipe/$RECIPE_ID being the simplest. >> >> That seems pretty gross. >>
I don't think it's gross. I think recipes need names, and so this schema is unrealistic. (owner, distroseriessourcepackage, recipename) seems about right to me. I guess there's some code in branchnamespace.py that can be re-used. > And we have a policy in Launchpad (broken in at least one place - blueprint > vocabulary) not to expose meaningless internal database identifiers to end > users. > Where's the policy? mpt was arguing for a while that merge proposals should be done like this. Also, we expose database IDs for bugs. jml _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
