Hi Rob!

Rob Miller wrote:
yuppie wrote:
Rob Miller wrote:
- allow extension profiles to specify which of the base profile's import steps they depend on, so that only these can be run, instead of the current situation where, AFAICT, you have to either run them all or manually examine the profile and select the steps to run

- draw a more clear distinction between the base profile and the extension profiles. instead of having the extension profiles piggy-backing on the base profile, extension profiles would explicitly define all of their own import steps, so that they can be applied cleanly on top of existing sites w/o becoming quite so muddled w/ the default configuration. this would also make it easier to implement an uninstall process that would remove the extension profile from the site.

These solutions will create new problems regarding the procedure for exports and re-imports.

can you elaborate on this so i can understand the issues? it seems that, for the first of these two options at least, it wouldn't be hard to make it work w/o actually changing any current behaviour.

Sorry. I have to differentiate more:

The problems with the first approach are different ones. First it is a BBB issue: All existing extension profiles have to provide that additional information before we can rely on it. And second there are different opinions regarding the future of setup steps: IMHO they should not be part of any profile and registered globally instead.

Regarding the second approach: Let's use the action handler as example. The export step for actions is responsible for *all* actions, not just those added by a specific profile. It would not make sense to export all existing action import steps because the new profile has only one actions.xml. A snapshot is a new profile and needs a new action import step. We either have to collect all the import steps from each profile we ever loaded or we have to remove import steps if they are no longer needed. But we can't remove all import steps of non-active profiles because the step_registries handler needs them for writing exports.

I don't say these issues can't be resolved, but I can't see the benefit of the additional complexity. Why would this make it easier to implement an uninstall process?



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

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

Reply via email to