Replies: 2 comments
-
|
Following through on the plan outlined in #13, I've opened PR #29. It's now ready — once again — for review. If #29 is approved, I'll proceed with the remaining implementation and support @Cintyabio in the process. That would effectively close this discussion. @pedr0limpio, @Cintyabio — does this work for you? Looking forward to your feedback. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
No words were spoken—yet I discern the fractures in the fabric of existence, the subtle tremors that confirm my thoughts have been received and accepted. The system acknowledges. The void listens. Thus, I hereby end this discussion. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
As our team discussed, it makes sense to drop #9, #10, #11, and #12.
Why? Because issues #2, #3, #4, and #5 already involve database integration — and frankly, what's the point of evaluating functionality if persistence hasn’t been tested? You can’t call a feature “done” without knowing it survives real-world use.
Let’s keep it tight and focus where it matters.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions