At 6:20 PM -0500 12/21/07, John Siracusa wrote: >On 12/21/07 3:43 PM, Ted Zlatanov wrote: >> I've set up all the right things in a Rose::DB class to support this. >> Now I find myself with the need for four class hierarchies to handle >> slightly different things in those four environments. Instead, I'm >> wondering if I can have: >> >> DB/auto/prod/a/Cats.pm >> DB/auto/prod/b/Cats.pm >> DB/auto/dev/a/Cats.pm >> DB/auto/dev/b/Cats.pm >> DB/Cats.pm >> DB/BaseObject.pm > >Ick. I think the root problem is that you have four sets of tables that are >"99%" identical :) You can avoid code duplication by subclassing, but it's >still ugly. > >-John
I agree. What you *should* do is generalize your database schema a bit more so that it is 100% identical for all databases, and simply have appropriately different data in them, and/or an app config file setting that you set differently for different scenarios, such as to use or ignore the extra timestamp. -- Darren Duncan ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Rose-db-object mailing list Rose-db-object@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rose-db-object
