[Dev] Objection to the new CPIA example

[Katie Capps Parlante]

Hi Bryan,

The resolution was to bring conflicts to the list (just as you have done 
here). We don't yet have a complete formal governance structure for 
resolving such conflicts, other than that I will step in and make sure 
we arrive at a resolution if we don't acheive convergence in a 
reasonable amount of time.

I'm sympathetic to your point here. I'll wait to hear John and Donn's 
arguments for why we should make this change before weighing in further.

Cheers,
Katie

Bryan Stearns wrote:
> There was a brief discussion a week or so ago about what happens when a 
> reviewer disagrees with a change; that discussion didn't come to any 
> conclusion, so I don't know what the process is to object to a change 
> that I didn't review.  This particular issue is something that I'm 
> *very* frustrated by, but I'm trying to work through it in our open 
> process, so here goes:
> 
> The change below is supposed to be an example, but much of it introduces 
> a new mechanism for associating detail views with items, and the example 
> just shows how to use that. At the meeting last week where John proposed 
> this, I objected to it strongly, on the grounds that we already have a 
> satisfactory mechanism for associating detail views with items, which 
> isn't hard to use -- adding another doesn't serve any useful purpose. I 
> stated then that it's important, in example code, to focus on showing 
> techniques that you expect developers to use in their code; it's bad to 
> give examples that you wouldn't want developers to ship. I feel strongly 
> that our examples should focus on doing things "the Chandler way"; if 
> that "way" needs to be refined, fine, let's refine it, but let's not 
> pollute it with alternatives we don't need.
> 
> I'd like to suggest that this change be backed out, and that John (or 
> someone else) find a way to show how to add a new content item type and 
> a detail view for it without creating a new structural mechanism to do so.
> 
> ...Bryan
>