As initial suggested by Jack Purdue on the mailing list.
> I'd suggest another database table called "states"
> with the following attributes/fields:
> state_id - short int
> state_name - short string (char 10 or so)
> state_desc - long string
> state_readonly - bool
> and then loading them up. I think that will be
> much more robust in the long term since it means
> we don't have to keep the code aligned with the DB
> schema and it also kinda nails down the definition
> of the states.
> Of course, we'll need a little "state edit" screen
> like what is available for projects.
> Anyway... just a thought.
Sounds good to me. The reason why it is the way it is
is because of "hysterical" reasons - the days before
Codestriker even used a database for persistence.
Having said that, there is no reason why we couldn't
migrate to the above schema.
Log in to post a comment.