Tim Bunce wrote:
I don't think do. And neither is DataWarehouse.
Looking at the code it seems to me this is a 'framework' of
inter-related modules that share a common set of assumptions.
(Which mandates one particular SQL syntax and hand-builds SQL
without proper quoting!)
As such I think it should be given a 'framework brand name' instead of
being 'crowned' with the 'obvious' name (or an abbreviation of it).
Thanks for the feedback.
Two comments:
1) The code is alpha - expect everything to change.
2) I agree with your comment about "obvious" vs. "brand" name.
So, I'm planning to remove all the framework-specific code, and create a
framework brand name as you suggested.
I'll possibly keep DataWarehouse to describe, as generally as possible,
Facts, Dimensions, and Aggregates.
What do you think?
