Obviously for those wanting to develop their own "complicated" solutions, a
local database is more efficient. I was not thinking of them when I did the
suggestion. 
Is a question of being able to use new codes as they come out, without
further development. I am thinking of simple things like our own reference,
Client's TAX number, etc.  Today you don't ask developers to change the size
of fields, why would you if their was 4 or 5 new miscellaneous ones?
Anything that means more flexibility without meaning much programming for
developers I think is of interest to all of us.
Thanks.



Jose Luis Moya
AlSur


on 2/10/00 20:52, Derek Glidden at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Charles Daminato wrote:
>> 
>> If you wish to have database access to specific custom information for
>> each of your clients, it might be better to develop a local system for
>> database accesses.
> 
> I have to agree with this.  Invariably what will happen (I've been
> developing databases for quite some time, so I believe I'm speaking with
> the benefit of experience...) is that four "miscellanious" fields will
> go in, and then someone will need five.  If five go in, someone will
> want six.  Or they're not long enough.  Or they need to be indexed in a
> certain way...  But you get the point.
> 
> It's quite easy to keep a local database that you can extend and modify
> to your heart's content.  Plus, you will have a much faster turnaround
> with changes to the database you maintain than to one that Tucows has
> control over.  
> 
> (Well, at least in theory.  They seem to be pretty good at turning over
> new version of their client code pretty quickly.  :)
> 
> 
>> Jose Luis Moya wrote:
>>> 
>>> I would like to suggest to developers for the next version of API to include
>>> a number of fields on the database that us RSPs can use depending on our
>>> needs. 4 or 5 text fields (RSPfield1,2,3...) that could be included when
>>> orders are processed would allow us to incoporate whatever data that might
>>> be of interest to us without the need of further implementation on the
>>> script.
>>> This fields could be visible only with each active domain on the RSP admin
>>> interface.

Reply via email to