On 20 Dec 2005, at 23:32, yuppie wrote:
After reading the thread you mention, which isn't all that clear when it comes to outlining what the consequences of some of these code changes are, I'm confused. I think I can boil it down to one question: What is the use of the CMF 1.6 branch if it is not compatible to Plone 2.1/2.1.1 and 2.1.2 when it comes out, and possibly not even 2.2 since that's only a few months down the road? I don't quite understand the distinction between "compatible with products written for Plone 2.1 but not with Plone 2.1", I can't see any sense in that route... it all comes back to one question: What is the goal for the 1.6 branch? What specific audience is it targeted at? I can see what it's apparently *not* targeted at: People who work with Plone 2.1 - including those that might be interested in taking up GenericSetup for their Plone product. I had thought that was our audience.

AFAICT the original target audience were people that want to switch to Plone 2.2 and reuse Products written for 2.1.

That might have changed over time, but the code never reflected that change.

Unless someone fixes that CMFDynamicsomethingFTI thing (or the CMF 1.6 branch) people cannot even attempt to run Plone 2.1 or 2.2 against CMF 1.6. This is like a stalemate. Can you suggest how to add a new kind of factory information class similar to appending it to that typeClasses structure so Martin can fix the Plone code for whatever release they want to make CMF 1.6-compatible then?


Zope-CMF maillist  -  Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org

See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests

Reply via email to