Custom Fields again

Bradley Baetz bbaetz at
Wed Dec 11 13:37:11 UTC 2002

On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 08:22:01AM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> On 12/12/02 12:18 AM +1100, Bradley Baetz wrote:
> >> Adding a custom field is either an initial
> >> configuration thing or it's a Big Deal to add when you do it.
> >
> > Why is it a Big Deal? Or rather, why should it be a Big Deal?
> Because you're
> a) changing the schema

No, thats backwards :) I agre that changing the schema is a Big Deal
(which is part of the reason I don' think that this is a good idea), but
that doesn't imply that adding a new field should be a Big Deal - that
argument would have you using a cmdline process even if we go with my
linked tables scheme.

> b) changing your developer's bug tracking process

Not necessarily. It fact, not usually. You're going to be adding the
ability to add more information to the bug, and thats about it. How does
adding a field for the os, or the platform, or for the phase of the
moon, require a potentially long downtime?


More information about the developers mailing list