Differential D17020 Diff 41522 src/applications/release/OPEN_QUESTIONS

Changeset View

Standalone View

src/applications/release/OPEN_QUESTIONS

	Some questions I have that will effect this diff (Also remember to delete this			Some questions I have that will effect this diff (Also remember to delete this
	file when done):			file when done):

	- expandTransaction: Because I decided to implement "custom actions" using			- expandTransaction: Because I decided to implement "custom actions" using
	transactions (P2009), I ended up having xactions that are shown on the			transactions (P2009), I ended up having xactions that are shown on the
	timeline ("avive has frozen this release"), but their actual work is been			timeline ("avive has frozen this release"), but their actual work is been
	handled by another xaction ("CloseBranchTransaction"). expandTransaction is			handled by another xaction ("CloseBranchTransaction"). expandTransaction is
	how the old transaction code handled this, but it didn't make it to the			how the old transaction code handled this, but it didn't make it to the
	modular code.			modular code.
	Should I just find a new way to do it?			Should I just find a new way to do it?
	- What kind of Edges do we need? RepositoryInRelease, ?			- What kind of Edges do we need? RepositoryInRelease, ObjectRequestedAsChangeForRelease,
				Lint: Line Too Long Inline Actions This line is 88 characters long, but the convention is 80 characters. Lint: Line Too Long: This line is 88 characters long, but the convention is 80 characters.
				ChangeRequestInRelease, ?
				- Should Change Request have their own policy, subscribers, comments, etc.?
				- Transactions Metadata: That one didn't make the cut for modular-transactions
				either. For the case of "Updates on CR show up on the Release page", they
				would be very useful. Do we hate it?
				- In Releeph, there's a "want" status, that's corresponds to Differential's
				Accept, and distinct from "Pull" status. Is that an important enough feature
				to include as first-class? Is there a way to include something like that as
				a Custom Field?


	General questions:			General questions:
	- EditEngine::buildCustomEditFields(): Why don't we move the field definitions			- EditEngine::buildCustomEditFields(): Why don't we move the field definitions
	into the *TransactionType classes, and then use reflection to implement this			into the *TransactionType classes, and then use reflection to implement this
	method? It looks like there's a 1-1 relation between fields and xaction types.			method? It looks like there's a 1-1 relation between fields and xaction types.


	Show All 14 Lines