updateDataEntry! should not be allowed?

[dehann]

Did we decide that data entries are immutable and should not updatable?

This was big enough to be dubbed the "Falmouth Manifesto" a while back

[dehann]

perhaps a better verb here would be replaceDataEntry!? The idea being that replacement means the unique object identifier that is used is changed and the user is also aware that the old data is no longer available. This gets a little tricky when trying to work with the description label only -- e.g. add entry :RADAR to dfg object and push it up to server, Then the server changes :RADAR and how is client supposed to know (and visa verse).

[Affie]

Perhaps DFG "core" should just remain vanilla with normal CRUD. The smarter functionality can then be added in the next layers such as CloudGraphsDFG for example.

[dehann]

what is the different between updateData! and updateDataEntry! ?

maybe rename to _updateDataEntry!?