On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 4:03 PM, John Reese <[email protected]> wrote: > The biggest problem with inheritence is that the subproject model for > MantisBT is far too flexible and complex. eg, you could have three > projects A, B and C in a hierarchy like: > > A > - C > B > - C > > where C is a subproject of both A and B. In this sort of case, how do > you handle inheriting configurations that are present in both A and B?
I think this problem stems from the fact we are implementing subprojects using the wrong analogy. The current implementation resembles class inheritance so C is acting like a subclass of A, and configuration, versions etc A are inherited by C. Instead, my opinion is that we should use the "composition" analogy, so C represent a smaller part of both A and B. Configurations and versions of C should appear both in A and B, of course with the option for C to overwrite any of them. Just my 0.02 -- Gianluca Sforna http://morefedora.blogspot.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/gianlucasforna ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensign option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects _______________________________________________ mantisbt-help mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mantisbt-help
