Hi,
On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 13:54 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
Thanks again!
(Note to everyone else, Shane and I discussed this on IRC, along with
another alternative that I'll mention below.)
I like version 2 better than version 1. I'd be inclined to simplify
and it and skip the
Christian Theune wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 13:54 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
Thanks again!
(Note to everyone else, Shane and I discussed this on IRC, along with
another alternative that I'll mention below.)
I like version 2 better than version 1. I'd be inclined to simplify
and
On Apr 30, 2009, at 5:01 PM, Christian Theune wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 13:54 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
Thanks again!
(Note to everyone else, Shane and I discussed this on IRC, along with
another alternative that I'll mention below.)
I like version 2 better than version 1. I'd be
Problem
---
In multi-database configurations, ZODB applications can unintentionally
create cross-database references. The causes include moving (rather
than copying) an object between containers, storing an object in a
session database and later moving it to the main database, and using a
Thanks again!
(Note to everyone else, Shane and I discussed this on IRC, along with
another alternative that I'll mention below.)
I like version 2 better than version 1. I'd be inclined to simplify
and it and skip the configuration flag and simply publish an event any
time we see a
On 4/28/09 1:54 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
An interim step, if we're in a hurry to get 3.9 out, is to simply add
the flag. This would disallow cross-database references in new
applications. These applications could still support multiple
databases by providing application-level traversal across
