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 
> >> problems, not the middle of the maintenance release cycle...
> > 
> > I'm puzzled, too. It looks like nobody has ever used or tested
> > CMFBTreeFolder under CMF 1.5.

I suspect the reason is that most people don't use CMFBTreeFolder
directly but just mixin BTreeFolder2 with whatever classes they need.

At least that's what we do.

> Agreed.  I'll bet that there is a trivial fix which would resolve the
> issue.  I *really* don't like the fact that the CMF-dependent parts got
> merged into the core Zope product in 2.8;  we should remove that, and
> perhaps land the "fixed" CMFBTree module in CMFCore.

I also support moving CMFBTreeFolder out of the Zope 2.8 core, if we can
find a way of doing it with minimal impact (and taking into account that
a little impact now is better than a big headache in the future when
things diverge). The inclusion of BTreeFolder was good, but nobody
thought of the CMFBTreeFolder in it.


Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France)   CTO, Director of R&D
+33 1 40 33 71 59   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Zope-CMF maillist  -

See for bug reports and feature requests

Reply via email to