Shane Hathaway wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Apr 23, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 23. April 2008 09:20:00 -0600 Shane Hathaway
I am suggesting we change that decision and simultaneously make
ZODB 3.9 only slightly different from ZODB 3.8.
AFAIK, Jim is working on major ZODB changes for ZODB 3.9. Could
those major changes into ZODB 3.10 and create ZODB 3.9 with only
feature enhancements, then use ZODB 3.9 with Zope 2.11?
Zope 2.11 will ship with ZODB 3.8 - not with 3.9.
The ZODB trunk already has some significant changes from 3.8.
I'm sorry, I must have expressed the idea unclearly. Here is what I
1. Declare that the ZODB trunk is the future ZODB 3.10 rather than
2. Create a ZODB 3.9 branch as an exact copy of ZODB 3.8.
3. Check in only a few minor patches to the new ZODB 3.9 branch.
4. Include the new, less-different ZODB 3.9 in Zope 2.11.
That way, Zope 2.11 can include some minor enhancements to ZODB that
we wouldn't be able to include if we shipped Zope 2.11 with ZODB 3.8
(since ZODB 3.8 is already released).
I think the onle proposed changes that would be in this new 3.9 are your
invalidation patch and my authentication patch, is that correct?
Considering the interest there appears to be in RelStorage that may make
a lot of sense - currently we need to monkey-patch ZODB to use
RelStorage and I'ld rather not have to do that.
Now I'ld love to have a release from current trunk as well to be able to
have an official release with blob support, but I understand that that
may not be realistic short term.
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org