Andreas Jung wrote:


--On 23. April 2008 09:39:57 -0600 Shane Hathaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 23. April 2008 09:20:00 -0600 Shane Hathaway
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  wrote:
AFAIK, Jim is working on major ZODB changes for ZODB 3.9.  Could we move
those major changes into ZODB 3.10 and create ZODB 3.9 with only modest
feature enhancements, then use ZODB 3.9 with Zope 2.11?
Zope 2.11 will ship with ZODB 3.8 - not with 3.9.
I am suggesting we change that decision and simultaneously make ZODB 3.9
only slightly different from ZODB 3.8.  I would not suggest this if Zope
2.11 were in beta, but it's still in alpha.

The changes in ZODB 3.9 would be necessary in order to make Relstorage work
out-of-the-box with Zope 2.11 (ZODB invalidation patch), right? I would be happy to see Relstorage work out-of-the-box with Zope 2.11 since Relstorage has a great potential. However the ZODB should be as little as possible and of course backward compatible. Also have in mind that are already installations running in production using the blob support of ZODB 3.8. However the risks should be low and there must be a consensus among the core developer.

I agree. Even if Jim approves the patch or a variation of it, I am a little hesitant to include the patch in ZODB 3.8 simply because to do so could be considered a violation of release policy (it is a new feature, after all). However, a consensus among the core ZODB developers could override that policy.

Shane

_______________________________________________
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
http://www.zope.org/Wikis/ZODB/

ZODB-Dev mailing list  -  ZODB-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zodb-dev

Reply via email to