On 7/20/06, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote:
remember to check "WHERE deleted=0". Do we really want to introduce that extra step?
I'm not giving this thumbs up or down, just pointing out that there are more costs involved in such a mechanism than tweaking a few queries in the patch.
We already generally need a "where status = " on most queries so this is just one more where clause. I'm sure people protested about the "status =" when it was introduced, but it makes sense in the long run. This is similar - we will grumble while we transition and love it in the long run. Maybe I'm just being overly tolerant, maybe this is the straw that breaks the camel's back, but I don't think this is _that_much_ more painful than the current query system that it necessitates a whole new object API to replace SQL access. Regards, Greg -- Greg Knaddison | Growing Venture Solutions Denver, CO | http://growingventuresolutions.com Technology Solutions for Communities, Individuals, and Small Businesses