Custom fields schema

Christopher Hicks chicks at
Thu Jan 27 14:41:16 UTC 2005

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Myk Melez wrote:
> While weighing Sean's success with FAD at his installation, we should also 
> weigh the success of FAC on hundreds of Bugzilla installations for a number 
> of years, both for standard fields and for custom ones, not to mention the 
> general success of FAC in database design.

There's enough text being sent around about this without straw man 
arguments such as this.  If none of those folks are doing custom fields as 
extensively as Sean is then they're not relevant to this discussion. 
That leaves one working example that applies to the question of how to 
implement custom fields and that is Sean's.  Given the choice between 
betting on the horse going around the track and the horse in your 
imagination, my money is on Sean.  If I could only find a bookie.

Beyond that, I don't think nearly as much credit has been given to Sean 
for (A) making something that works and being willing to share it or (B) 
his persistence in battling with bugzilla developers who seem to ignore A.

In this whole FAC vs. FAR debate I think I've missed something.  In Sean's 
discussion of Myk's proposal he indicated that Myk was proposing that each 
new custom field would be in its own table.  Is that really so?  Am I the 
only person who finds that bizarre?  I can understand FAR being a tough 
pill for a relational die hard to swallow, but coming up with something 
even more outlandish as an alternative is bizarre.


"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)

More information about the developers mailing list