On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 01:31:58PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 05:05:33PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Well, machine readable file is one thing. At first we need to define
> > the SQL table layout. Currently the philosophy in UDD is to have the
> > tables not normalised but I think it makes sense to normalise to some
> > extend into three tables because it simplifies things we intend to do:
> >
> > CREATE TABLE blends_packages (
> > -- fieldname type, -- example_value
> > blend TEXT REFERENCES blends_metadata,
> > task TEXT REFERENCES blends_tasks,
> > package TEXT, -- 'gromacs'
>
> Shouldn't/couldn't that be a foreign key to a general binary-packages
> table, assuming that exists?
I'm hesitating for two reasons:
1. UDD is intentionally very sparse with foreign keys (I used these
here basically for clarifying issues and because these tables
are not interconnected with other tables (except for the package
name as you mentioned)
2. We have the table blends_prospectivepackages and I could potentially
imagine rather an additional flag field like this
distribution TEXT,
featuring values like 'debian', 'ubuntu', 'prospective' or something
like this - this would break the foreign key constraint. Even if
I'm not sure whether this will be really implemented I do not see
any reason for doing some over-design in the database table which
might prevent some reasonable enhancement.
Thanks for the hint anyway
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
