Martin Aspeli wrote:
Hedley Roos wrote:
If you really need to extend a particular extender, I would subclass
it,
and then register an override utility (i.e. with the same name). If
you want more control, you should make a new content type.
Martin
Yes! That is exactly what I'm doing. After struggling with all the
permutations I don't think there is another way.
I don't think it's a bad way, though. :)
Martin
To summarize:
Adapter order with classes that implement ISchemaExtender are not an
issue. The field declarations are additive. The only possible issue is
when redeclaring a field. AFAIK the last applied declaration should win.
With classes that implement IOrderableSchemaExtender adapter order is an
issue since you are bound to run into problems with the getOrder method.
I create an orderable extender and place it in overrides.zcml with the
same name(s) as adapters it is supposed to override. This extender does
not have to subclass the extenders it intends to override - you can
simply concatenate the fields. One catch: the extenders that you
override *must* implement IOrderableSchemaExtender else the overrides
will not take effect.
Hedley
_______________________________________________
Product-Developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/product-developers
