[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [stellation-res] Databases, artifacts and all the rest...
|
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 11:34:47AM +0100, Ringo De Smet wrote:
> Hello,
>
> About artifacts:
> <statement>
> We don't go far enough in using artifact types!
> </statement>
> I wondered why things like versions, projects, branches are not
> modelled as artifact types. There are tables for it, why not model it
> as artifacts then? I could start modelling artifacts like a solution
> map (is it clear that I'm a VisualAge for Java user? :), bug reports
> (why split bug tracking from development?), ...
> Having nothing but artifacts would remove the need for
> DBAccessPoint.createRepository. At this point in time, we already have
> the SQL in one place: the ArtifactAgents and no longer in
> DBAccessPoint.
>
There is a limit to how much abstraction we want to add. A branch is, after all, just
a branch, and I don't think worth generalizing. Our current goal is to get a solid
core which supports lightweight branches of directory trees of versioned 'stuff', where
the stuff is managed by agents. Once the core is solid, others can then build on it,
but we want the core to be as stable as possible.
dave
--
Dave Shields, IBM Research, shields@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
