Re: [Zope-dev] Re: death to index_html; ObjectManager?

2002-04-17 Thread Toby Dickenson

On Tuesday 16 Apr 2002 10:25 pm, Casey Duncan wrote:

However, you should know that the crux of this change is really to the
publisher, the mixin is just the management piece.

Hmmm. Thanks for raising this. I wasnt aware that these browser_default 
changes went so deep.

Im curious as to *why* they do. It looks like the requirements on the wiki 
could have been implemented by getting the management interface to add a 
smart index_html attribute that delegates to the real method.

 *any* object can
define a browser_default hook that overrides 'index_html', not just
objectmanagers.

Ive just checked through the implementation to see if you really mean *any* 
object. and you do. The name browser_default is in the namespace 
accessible to PropertyManager (for properties) and ObjectManager (for 
sub-objects).  I guess this choice was deliberate, but I can see it being a 
problem for all those objects that are objects not content.

I would be happier if this change to ZPublisher was conditional on something 
outside the through-the-web manageable namespace, and something which means 
it is turned off by default for legacy objects. Either an interface 
assertion, or something like:

*** lib/python/ZPublisher/BaseRequest.py27 Mar 2002 21:51:05 -  
1.47
--- lib/python/ZPublisher/BaseRequest.py17 Apr 2002 08:39:49 -
***
*** 254,256 
  entry_name = path.pop()
! elif hasattr(getattr(object, 'aq_base', object),
   'browser_default'):
--- 254,258 
  entry_name = path.pop()
! elif getattr(getattr(object, 'aq_base', object),
!  '_implements_browser_default', 0) and \
!  hasattr(getattr(object, 'aq_base', object),
   'browser_default'):





___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )



Re: [Zope-dev] Re: death to index_html; ObjectManager?

2002-04-16 Thread Jeffrey P Shell

On 4/16/02 8:53 AM, Casey Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 The implementation adds the API to manage browser default for all
 objectmanagers. However, no browser_default handler is actually added to
 the object unless you specify a default other than index_html
 
 What was the specific undesirable effects you were seeing?
 
 If it is agreed that this management should apply to folders rather than
 all object managers, then I can make this change. In that case using a
 separate mix-in makes sense to me. It could even be registered for use
 as a base class for ZClasses then, which would be some advantage I suppose.

+1 for the separate mix-in.  I use ObjectManager as a base class frequently
for non-folderish objects, for which the whole 'death to index_html' notion
is moot. 

-- 
Jeffrey P Shell 
www.cuemedia.com




___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )



Re: [Zope-dev] Re: death to index_html; ObjectManager?

2002-04-16 Thread Casey Duncan

Well I honestly hadn't considered that. So, I suppose changing to to a 
mix-in inherited by folder is better.

However, you should know that the crux of this change is really to the 
publisher, the mixin is just the management piece. *any* object can 
define a browser_default hook that overrides 'index_html', not just 
objectmanagers.

-Casey

Jeffrey P Shell wrote:
 On 4/16/02 8:53 AM, Casey Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 
The implementation adds the API to manage browser default for all
objectmanagers. However, no browser_default handler is actually added to
the object unless you specify a default other than index_html

What was the specific undesirable effects you were seeing?

If it is agreed that this management should apply to folders rather than
all object managers, then I can make this change. In that case using a
separate mix-in makes sense to me. It could even be registered for use
as a base class for ZClasses then, which would be some advantage I suppose.

 
 +1 for the separate mix-in.  I use ObjectManager as a base class frequently
 for non-folderish objects, for which the whole 'death to index_html' notion
 is moot. 
 
 




___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )



Re: [Zope-dev] Re: death to index_html; ObjectManager?

2002-04-16 Thread R. David Murray

On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Casey Duncan wrote:
 However, you should know that the crux of this change is really to the
 publisher, the mixin is just the management piece. *any* object can
 define a browser_default hook that overrides 'index_html', not just
 objectmanagers.

All the more reason to make it a mixin, yes?

--RDM



___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )