"changed" field should be deleted
- Previous message (by thread): "changed" field should be deleted
- Next message (by thread): "changed" field should be deleted
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Daniel Karrenberg
Daniel.Karrenberg at ripe.net
Fri Jun 5 16:43:55 CEST 1998
> Joe Abley <jabley at clear.co.nz> writes: > > Perhaps the displayed/retrieved version of the "changed" field should > include a message-id instead of the e-mail address? These are supposed to > be unique, and usually contain a hostname/FQDN that is probably sufficient > to identify the updater. > > I am assuming that the vast majority of people make updates using > e-mail... Can we limit the discussion to the quick fix of hiding the changed field for standard queries. The re-design of the audit trail has been discussed before and should be considered thoroughly based on a proposal covering all aspects. Daniel
- Previous message (by thread): "changed" field should be deleted
- Next message (by thread): "changed" field should be deleted
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]