On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Leonard Richardson <[email protected]> wrote: ... > Yeah, the named operation setTarget(package, project) is confusing. But > the internal method setTarget(self, package, project) is also confusing, > in exactly the same way! If we leave it in place internally and patch > over it for the web service (which is what we talk about when we talk > about annotations), we're letting our users have the good stuff but > we're still using the not-so-good stuff internally.
IIRC, it was added specifically so we could expose it over the webservice API. ... > At this point, I'd suggest we refactor the existing HWDB data model into > the simpler data model, rather than have to keep two different data > models in our heads. Why not? It's a lot of work, but not that much more > work than writing a whole other data model, and at the end our > application will be better. Because the public-facing data model is less > efficient? That's a reason not to publish at all--it's a bad idea to > publish an inefficient data model and hope our users don't use it too > much. I very much agree. I've wanted to expose the more abstract bits of the branch model – IBranchTarget, IBranchCollection, IBranchNamespace – over the webservice API for a very long time now. Thing is, I've not known how to do it. > I hope it doesn't feel like I'm suddenly springing this on you. This has > been our plan for quite a while, but up to this point we've been > focusing on creating a web service with a solid foundation that > publishes all the Launchpad artifacts. Now is a good time to start > talking about the best way to *improve* the design of the web service. Yay. 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
