Hi. Martin Aspeli wrote: >> > I assume this applies to base and extension profiles equally, then? >> > So, it won't re-run the base CMFPlone profiles 'types.xml' if we >> > activate Poi as an extension profile, nor will it re-run >> > RichDocument's types.xml even if RichDocument was the previously >> > installed/activated profile? >> >> Correct.
Hhm, I was just looking into this in detail, but it's good to get my suspicion verfied. I will write a test for it anyways ;) > Rarely so happy be wrong :) > > So if we had a procedural way of doing uninstall/cleanup where it was > necessary, I think we'd be pretty close with Hanno's QI branch. Yay :) We have. As Alec pointed out the usual hooks of QI are still working, so you can still use an Extensions.Install.uninstall to do any manual cleanup you want. I should note that I put the checks for extension profile based installation after the ones based on external methods, so the external method always wins and the new approach is only used if you have no Extensions.Install.install method at all. My hope right now is that with the new QI feature of extension profile support (which works fine under Plone 2.5 as well) we could finally tell Add-on product developers to use GenericSetup. Maybe we could include this even in a minor release of Plone 2.5.x to enable people to switch now, but at least for Plone 3.0 we need it to be able to deprecate the old mechanism from Archetypes. Of course we still need to fix the current Archetypes mechanism to work with CMF 2.1. As we havn't deprecated it yet, we cannot brake it. So for Plone 3.0 (or maybe 2.5.2 as well) we would have both traditional AT-based and new GS-based installation support with deprecation warnings for the AT-based one. Hanno _______________________________________________ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team