Re: Fair large change to contributors

On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 07:59:38AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 11:23:58PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >>Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
> >>>correct. And I repeat that I see no actual gain countering this
> >>>annoyance... If there was enough on the plus side, I'd be happy to live
> >>>with it...
> >>Consistency is more important than general annoyance but I am trying to
> >
> >The system is *specifically designed* not to lock filenames to URLs. I
> >don't understand why you have such a hard time to accept that ;-)
>
> It isn't that I don't accept it. The design is fine. That doesn't mean
> it is a good idea to start naming files in a way that is counter to
> their purpose.
>
> Consider... I have a table called people but fill it full of companies.
> That is wrong. Consistency is extremely important to the maintenance of
> any project and any code base.
>
> Your suggest opens the doors for a horrible pile of spaghetti over the
> years. Consider... we have developers in contributors, sponsors in
> donors, resources in links on and on and on.
>
> It is a mistake, flat out.

On this, we obviously disagree.

> >For example, hosting pages are served by professional.php. Techdocs are
> >served by communitydocs.php. That is *intended*.
> >
>
> If it is intended it is a mistake. Techdocs should be served by techdocs
> and now my point above is made.

No. Because community docs is designed to be able to handle much more than
what's currently named techdocs.

> >>find a happy medium here. What if I leave the old file in place but
> >>empty with a comment of why? Thus the svn diff etc... stays intact.
> >
> >Eh, that's just plain stupid, really. If that's the option, then I'd rather
> >see the file removed.
>
> Good then we are agreed, let's remove the file :)

No :-) Let's not.

> >>Considering we are now talking about contributors not developer bios
> >>that should be sufficient.
> >>
> >>I will admit that I didn't change the underlying tables. I wanted to but
> >>didn't because I am unaware of what else may call to them.
> >
> >What did you want to change and how? I don't *think* anybody elses uses
> >them, except you'd have to update the admin interface as well of course.
>
> Just the table names so they were consistent with the pages. Is the
> admin interface in portal?

Yes. See the dispatcher and associated PHP classes ;-)

//Magnus