[Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-21 Thread Christian Heimes
Tres Seaver wrote: Thanks, Christian. I just forward-ported your change to the CMF-head. Please don't leave that out in the future! You are too fast for me. *g* I had to set up a sandbox for HEAD and I was fixing BTreeFolder2 in Zope and cvs. Christian PS: My checkins don't appear in the

[Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-21 Thread Christian Heimes
Tres Seaver wrote: We should chat about that. I created a Zope collector issue for that, and started work on it yesterday, About CMFBTreeFolder? Yeah it should be moved into CMF in the long run. My fix is working and we have time to fix it w/o hurry. I think it must be that your e-mail

[Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread yuppie
Hi Christian! Christian Heimes wrote: CMF 1.5's implementation of PortalFolder conflicts with CMFBTreeFolder. CMF 1.4: class PortalFolder(DynamicType, CMFCatalogAware, Folder) CMF 1.5: class PortalFolder(DynamicType, CMFCatalogAware, OrderedFolder) BTreeFolder2: class

[Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread Christian Heimes
yuppie wrote: First of all CMF 1.5.2 has to be backwards compatible to CMF 1.5.0 and 1.5.1, so reverting that change is no option. That is understandable from your point of view but I don't agree with the desicion. The new ordered PortalFolder has deep impacts on software that exists for

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread Jens Vagelpohl
On 20 Jun 2005, at 09:24, Christian Heimes wrote: yuppie wrote: First of all CMF 1.5.2 has to be backwards compatible to CMF 1.5.0 and 1.5.1, so reverting that change is no option. That is understandable from your point of view but I don't agree with the desicion. The new ordered

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread Julien Anguenot
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Christian Heimes wrote: yuppie wrote: First of all CMF 1.5.2 has to be backwards compatible to CMF 1.5.0 and 1.5.1, so reverting that change is no option. +1 That is understandable from your point of view but I don't agree with the desicion.

[Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread Christian Heimes
Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On a general note, if this is so important I am puzzled that this is coming up now and not *months* ago. CMF 1.5.0 has been released ages ago. Beta testing periods are the time to find and solve these problems, not the middle of the maintenance release cycle... I'm

[Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread yuppie
Hi Christian! Christian Heimes wrote: yuppie wrote: First of all CMF 1.5.2 has to be backwards compatible to CMF 1.5.0 and 1.5.1, so reverting that change is no option. That is understandable from your point of view but I don't agree with the desicion. This is not a decision, I'm not

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread Jens Vagelpohl
On 20 Jun 2005, at 10:56, yuppie wrote: The downside is that software written for CMF 1.5 has to be altered. But it is much easier to alter a few lines in some products than trying to get rid of the ordered stuff in PortalFolder. That's not fair. You are free to ignore CMF development

[Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Christian Heimes wrote: Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On a general note, if this is so important I am puzzled that this is coming up now and not *months* ago. CMF 1.5.0 has been released ages ago. Beta testing periods are the time to find and solve

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread Florent Guillaume
Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Christian Heimes wrote: Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On a general note, if this is so important I am puzzled that this is coming up now and not *months* ago. CMF 1.5.0 has been released ages ago. Beta testing periods are the time to find and solve these

[Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread Christian Heimes
yuppie wrote: PortalFolder is not just a base class, it's *the* folder class used in CMFDefault. Subclasses can mix in OrderSupport, but that has no effect on PortalFolder instances. Oh you are right. I had in mind that all content types are declared in CMFDefault. In this case I have to

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread Florent Guillaume
Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have another idea. The patch is attached to this mail. In short terms I have renamed PortalFolder to PortalFolderBase subclassed of Folder and created a new PortalFolder class subclassed from OrderedFolder. PortalFolderBase contains nearly all code

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread Jens Vagelpohl
On 20 Jun 2005, at 18:22, Tres Seaver wrote: Yvo, Jens, Florent: you were the last ones to chime on on the CMF 1.5.2 thread; would that work for you, assuming we merge Christian's patch? I can tag at any point in time. jens ___ Zope-CMF maillist

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread Dieter Maurer
Jens Vagelpohl wrote at 2005-6-20 11:48 +0100: ... I support that statement. In my opinion it is unacceptable to make this change on the CMF 1.5 branch at this point. If there is a problem, please change the software that relies on the old behavior instead. The new behaviour was ill

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread Dieter Maurer
Julien Anguenot wrote at 2005-6-20 11:19 +0200: Christian Heimes wrote: ... I'm proposing to change PortalFolder in the following way: * Revert PortalFolder to be subclassed from Folder * Create an OrederedPortalFolder as subclass from OrderedFolder * Subclass all classes in CMF from

[Zope-CMF] Re: Conflict between PortalFolder and CMFBTreeFolder

2005-06-20 Thread yuppie
Hi Christian! Christian Heimes wrote: yuppie wrote: That's not fair. You are free to ignore CMF development for years, but you can't make other people pay for that. Upgrading from 1.5.x to the latest 1.5 version has to work without *any* trouble. I'm sorry but I'm a little bit nervous. I