On Dec 12, 2007 7:18 AM, Encolpe Degoute <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wichert Akkerman a écrit :
> > My personal non-framework team opinion:
> >
> > Previously Encolpe Degoute wrote:
> >> I'd like to see the following for 3.1:
> >>
> >> #196: GroupUserFolder removing
> >>
> >> There were and there are a lot of critical UI bugs around
> >> GroupUserFolder by PlonePAS. Because of these, several Plone release had
> >> to be delayed. We fix a lot of them in customer branch.
> >
> > I think this is a too large undertaking for 3.1 and I suspect that there
> > is too much code that uses GRUF-APIs that (Plone)PAS does support, which
> > means that that code will break. That is not allowed in a 3.x release.
>
> I can do the UI part without modifying portal_groups and portal_groupdata.
>
> > I love the idea though :)
>
> Me too: It's one less product to maintain.
>
>
> >> #214: Merge of CMFPlacefulWorkflow into CMFPlone/WorkflowTool
> >>
> >> CMFPlacefulWorkflow is now mature enough to be merge into the workflow 
> >> tool:
> >>
> >>     * since two major version there's no critical bug on it
> >>     * GenericSetup support is implemented in the trunk
> >>     * let him outside the workflow tool would leave 2 more monkey
> >> patches in Plone bundle
> >>     * all page templates can be merged into a plone_workflow skin with
> >> the #210
> >
> > How does the CMF workflow tool factor into this? I would be nice if we
> > can remove the CMFPlone WorkflowTool and use the CMF one, but I have no
> > idea how the CMF community feels about CMFPlacefulWorkflow.
>
> I never had any report or any comment from CMF users or developpers.

I will be writing a PLIP shortly which will hopefully make any merging
of CMFPlacefulWorkflow into the workflow tool unnecessary.  The idea
is adapter based workflow assignment.  By default all IDynamicType
objects would be assigned a workflow chain using an adapter that does
the normal lookup in portal_workflow, but alternate means could be
provided with simple adapters.  CMFPlacefulWorkflow/CMFPlone would
probably just override the default adapter with one that relies on
acquisition, but there may be an even more elegant way.

Alec

_______________________________________________
Framework-Team mailing list
Framework-Team@lists.plone.org
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team

Reply via email to