Remy Blank wrote: > Christian Boos wrote: >> In fact, I'd be interested to know who else actually thinks that: >> " >> >> This kind of generic data storage system just >> doesn't fit with the Trac design philosophy. >> >> " > > I'm quite new around here, so I'm not sure I really know what the "Trac > design philosophy" is. But my reply to the above is: why not? If it > makes the code cleaner and more elegant, and the performance is > adequate, and it provides a solution to a real problem, then I'm all for it. > > More important to me than whether or not to introduce such a > functionality is *how* to introduce it. I tend to dislike large, > disruptive changes, and prefer incremental improvement and refactoring. > So if the above can be done incrementally, for example starting on one > or two modules, then refined and propagated step by step to other > modules, then I'm in.
Has anyone bothered to review the code? I think it's quite nice. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Development" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
