admin/raven
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
John Cardinal
2021-03-24 00:05:05 +00:00
parent 935bf5de1a
commit a6dd5fc090
3 changed files with 45 additions and 45 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

4
devdocs/specs/core-workorder.txt
View File

@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ todo: PLANNING WORKORDER considerations:
if any part fails it all fails
requires second copy of wo for diffing
UPDATE (PATCH): Send only changes in whole graph from client with an OP (for "operation") flag at each level indicating to change that part or not, a flag?
WO (OP flag=no change, no concurrency token, basically empty but for the fields that hold the descendents that are changed)
WO (OP flag=no change, no concurrency token, basically empty but for the fields that hold the descendants that are changed)
woitem 0 (OP flag="Delete" and concurrency token, no other data with it, just the id and flag and ctoken)
woitem 1 (OP flag ="update", all fields as in a "put" operation, nothing left out, assumed all are changed)
woitem2 (OP flag="no OP", just a placeholder for children with changes)
@@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ public class BuildingController : Controller {
ROUTES
In light of dependencies and concurrency it is ideal if the server can handle updates to any portion of the graph independently
But, do we really want CRUD routes for every descendent of the workorder graph? (maybe, just not sure)
But, do we really want CRUD routes for every descendant of the workorder graph? (maybe, just not sure)