Hi Florent!

Florent Guillaume wrote:
yuppie wrote:

I have to refine this statement: *For now* I don't want to go down that road. In the long run I think we have to keep track of applied profiles. That would help to make the setup tool more powerful and to implement features like reloading or uninstalling. But AFAICS doing this right requires a major refactoring and would come to late for CMF 1.6 or 2.0.

Major refactoring? I don't think so, at least not for storing the basic information about which profiles are applied, which is a first step toward more powerful features.

I guess we just have different expectations what "applied profiles" means. Of course we can maintain a list of profiles from which we imported all steps. But the fact a profile *was* once applied doesn't necessarily mean it *is* applied. We have no tools to keep track of partial imports and manual configuration changes. And we have no tools to inspect the current configuration and to compare it against a set of profiles.

Restoring the configuration from a snapshot makes the list of applied profiles useless, the currently necessary manual uninstall process can't be recorded.

I can see that this information might be useful, but it doesn't represent a state of the tool or the site. It has more the character of (sometimes incomplete) history information and I'd prefer to use the logging machinery for that.

It's not state per se, but it's information about what the administrator did to the site. It has the character of history, yes, but needs to be introspected by the tool to provide further features. Just logging the info doesn't cut it.

What about adding that information to the import logs and creating an import log for the initial site creation as well?

Logs aren't useful to implement better features.

Given the limitations of that information: Which features do you think this information should be used for?

FWIW, while we're on the topic of GenericSetup, CPS now has a strong need for extension profile dependencies and ordering. Or choice between mandatory alternate extension profiles (like, choose which extension profile will provide the authentication aspects of the portal). At some point we'll have to spec out something and code it.

I have some ideas regarding the future of extension profiles. I hope I'll soon find time to outline my thoughts.



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

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

Reply via email to