More custom field revisions

[Bradley Baetz]

On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 01:13:49PM +0100, Gervase Markham wrote:
> You appear to have got a bit confused (or I have.)
> 
> We currently have URLs like:
> 
> product=Bugzilla&...
> 
> He's proposing (as I understand it):
> 
> 37=Bugzilla&...   (where 37 is the ID of a custom field)

Well, field-37, anyway - I don't think that keys can be entirely
numbers, although I'd have to check specs to be sure.

> 
> You are proposing:
> 
> product=12&...    (where 12 is the ID of a product)

Yes.

> 
> Regarding your point (and not his), is that disadvantage (having to 
> update stored queries when product names change, which is a fairly rare 
> event) outweighed by the advantage of being able to do:
> 

Well, it also allows you to do stuff like just stick the new value into
the bug table in process_bug, and then just error out with teh
appropriate message if there was a foreign key violation. (I didn't say
I wanted to do this soon...)

> bzbot: query product=Bugzilla&target_milestone=2.18
> 
> as opposed to:
> 
> bzbot: product=3&target_milestone=2.18
> 

Well, bzbot is a special case. Most people don't construct query strings
themselves. The fact that #mozwebtools does is sort of abnormal :)

don't forget utf8 stuff. Those can't be done via GET, at least not
portably. I think. So we really have to use numbers.

Bradley