how to proceed with changed:

James Aldridge wrote:
> If people change jobs then it should be possible to perform an inverse query
> on the changed field in the same way as the admin-c, tech-c, etc. to permit
> updating of all affected records.
but why should one want to change, after the fact, the information about
who changed an entry in the past? Or just replace the old changed: line
by a new one? That would probably give false indication about the validity
of the data contained in the entry.

> If the time stamp is used to prevent out-of-sequence updates (if an update to
> auto-dbm gets held up in a mail queue somewhere, for example) then it has to
> remain part of the database entry and is not meta-information.
Agreed. But this is open for review. There are better prerequisites to check
before modifying or deleting an entry (e.g. a hash of the object, not including
any "changed" information).

Bottom line: I would like to see the latest modification date of an object
in response to any database query and an indication of an entity responsible
for this entry. "mnt-by" may serve that purpose if it is in there.

-Peter