On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 1:53 PM, Jason Etheridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> My point was that it's better than an arbitrary/random card. > > Right, it just might be effectively random from the point of view of > staff. It's definitely arbitrary (how do you pick which active card > to go into .card?)
Well, that's something the staff would assign -- a "default" card. They're all equal, but one card needs to be more equal than the others. > >> The other part to consider is 1) how often will a merge occur (I mean, >> is it something that would happen often enough that mistakes would be >> probable) and 2) from that (assumed small) set of merges, how often >> would a split be required after some amount of time had passed? > > And if the use case for unmerge happens once per epoch, then just let > folks fix things by hand (and/or database) if it happens, rather than > complicate the implementation for a seldom used feature? > That's what I'm trying to get someone else to say, yeah. My plan has worked!!! ;) -- Mike Rylander | VP, Research and Design | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Evergreen Experts | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | web: http://www.esilibrary.com
