This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/db-wg@ripe.net/
[db-wg] PERSON objects in the RIPE Database
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] PERSON objects in the RIPE Database
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] PERSON objects in the RIPE Database
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Daniel Suchy
danny at danysek.cz
Fri Sep 21 18:38:24 CEST 2018
Hello, On 9/21/18 5:00 PM, Cynthia Revström via db-wg wrote: > This really made me consider it, and I can't really see a valid reason > to require person objects to create a maintainer for example. You can use ROLE object instead of PERSON for maintaner creation (and of course for every object, where you can reference person object). Person is *not* required. Well, currently is not possible to create role-maintainer pair like person-maintainer with webuptates, but this isn't hard to implement I think. But you can easily workaround this by creating person-maintainer pair, then creating role, update maintainer and deleting (temporary) person object. With regards, Daniel
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] PERSON objects in the RIPE Database
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] PERSON objects in the RIPE Database
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]