Custom Fields again

[Bradley Baetz]

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?

Bradley