-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 357
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Create "catch all" categories #50
Comments
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 12, 2015
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 12, 2015
… guaranteed by the application. Additionally, we need this column to be null in order to implement and use the "catch all" categories
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 12, 2015
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 12, 2015
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 12, 2015
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 12, 2015
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 12, 2015
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 12, 2015
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 12, 2015
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 12, 2015
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 17, 2015
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 26, 2015
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 26, 2015
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 26, 2015
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 26, 2015
cbellone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 26, 2015
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
A member of jug Milano, during our presentation, pointed out that it could make sense to have a "catch all" category in the event, and that category should be the one at "full price".
After a little bit of analysis, we really like the original idea, but we would rather implement it as following:
This would simplify a lot the implementation of #39, since the waiting queue could be a special unbounded queue.
please feel free to share your thoughts
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: