Re: Alpha coordination and building
On Fri, Jun 11, 1999 at 03:40:30PM -0400, Christopher C Chimelis wrote:
>
> On Fri, 11 Jun 1999, Bart Warmerdam wrote:
>
> > Possible dB model:
> >
> >
> > Packages
> > ---------------------
> >
> > +--- pkgID long PK
> > | pkgName text
> > | pgkVersion text
> > | pkgDebRelease text
> > | pkgBuildsOk bool
> > | dateInstall date/time
> > | uploader text (example: Bart Warmerdam <bartw@xs4all.nl>)
> > | btsNotificationDate date/time
> > |
> > |
> > | ReportedBugs
> > | ---------------------
> > |
> > | btsBugNr long PK
> > +--- pkgID long
> > |
> > |
> > | Patches
> > | ---------------------
> > |
> > | bugID long PK
> > +--- pkgID long
> > url text
>
> Wouldn't it make more sense to put the btsNotificationDate field in the
> ReportedBugs table? Maybe just the sheer existance of a record in
> ReportedBugs for a package could be enough to trigger a checkbox or "View
> Bug Report Info" button on a query reponce.
Yes, it would. But the problem is that the time between submission and
assigned bugnr. It this is the case we should drop the btsBugNr and use
another PK. A record without a btsBugNr but with a btsNotificationDate is a
bug pending to be registered.
In any case btsNotificationDate is not right in my model...
B.
Reply to: