On Tue Sep 20 2011 Leo wrote: > Better support for organisation-only records. Also fix a bug when > firstname or lastname are nil. Comments welcome ;)
For those who did not browse Leo's code: The current BBDB code assumes that a record should have a name so that the record can be identified by this name. Leo's code adds the organization field as an alternative if a record has no name associated with it. I guess this is really raising two questions: - At least which fields should a record have filled to be a valid record? - What are possible usages of the organization field? While I can not yet claim I thought about this in all detail, in my own usage of BBDB I have looked at the organization field as a list of attributes for grouping records (by means of BBDB's search functions). This motivated the change to make the organization field a list (while in BBDB 2 it was a string): So one person might be a colleague from work, but also a member of this or that other organization. Then BBDB can make a list of all colleagues from work or some other organization. So if I make a BBDB record for something that's not a person, I put the name of this 'something' into the name field - so that the organization field is still available as a list of grouping attributes in much the same way it works for "real persons". An organization with a BBDB record can likewise be part of a larger network. Roland ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1 _______________________________________________ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
