Sam,
For the last 35 years I have been in Computer systems design and as a
DBA, I have never defined nor seen defined a name field as a number. I
use numbers for ID fields, part numbers, etc. I don't think the decision
was "arbitrarily stupid". Just a case of following Data Modeling
standards that have been around for decades.
Kenn
LBNL
Samuel P. Howard wrote:
Thanks for the quick reply.
Too bad that was so hard to find via the Wiki (hint: "username number"
doesn't find it) ... so, here's the answer:
-----
Q: Can RT handle usernames which contain only numbers?
A: No. Use alphabetic prefix instead, for eg 'u'.
-----
OK, ummm, why?
Without explanation, it sounds arbitrarily stupid. I'm going to assume
there's a good reason, or at least a historical one that would cause
internal problems to change this, but the DB doesn't appear to be the
limiter, so ... why?
Adding/removing a leading character is only going to be a huge pain in
the ass. Imagine trying to explain to every single customer that their
customer id for every other part of their web portal is 1000, *except*
for the ticket tracking system ... these are non-technical users that
generally struggle to cut and paste a URL into a browser.
--Sam
Ruslan Zakirov wrote:
FAQ
_______________________________________________
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy
a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
_______________________________________________
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
