[TYPO3-core] IRRE implementation bugs

[Kasper Skårhøj]

On Oct 20, 2007, at 18:41 , Martin Kutschker wrote:

> Kasper Skårhøj (GMAIL) schrieb:
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, that's not quite true. When you look at moving or copying of
>>> records, IRRE children are always copied/moved along with the  
>>> parent.
>>> (That is also why it's highly suggested to disable showing IRRE  
>>> child
>>> tables in the list module.)
>>> So in those cases, they ARE treated as one object inside TYPO3s  
>>> core as
>>> well.
>>
>> OK, but thats a bit I don't get. Why shouldn't it be possible to  
>> share a
>> child between two records as we can with normal group fields?
>>
>> In an implementation with these constraints, it has many implications
>> for the core parts elsewhere. What if I make a copy of a child?  
>> What if
>> I move it? What if I delete it? What if I link to it from another
>> record? Am I not then breaking the concept of "exclusive parenthood"?
>
> You're question lead to one answer: a child record may neither be  
> listed
> not manipulated on it's own. TCEmain must decline any command that
> request this and Web>Page, Web>List etc should honour this as well.

If this is true I can't endorse that conceptually I'm afraid. And I  
simply don't see why IRRE would require this constraint. It's adds  
lot of new complexity to an already complex TYPO3 core and IRRE  
becomes less flexible by not offering it's brilliant interface for  
applications where this constraint is in fact not wanted. So maybe  
someone can explain to me why this constraint was so important?

- kasper