Ah, I missed adding the relative path to the join table.  This is a fine idea 
as well.

On 06/30/2017 10:15 AM, Michael Hrivnak wrote:
> 
> Jeff, earlier in the thread we talked about using the through table to hold 
> the path. I think that's the right
> place, because the path would be a property of the relationship between an 
> artifact and a content unit. It
> also occurred to me that the file name could be different for different 
> content, so maybe the path would need
> to include the filename. That seems a bit weird, but I think it has to be the 
> case if we use a many-to-many
> relationship.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Pulp-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Reply via email to