Charlie Clark wrote:
Am 07.01.2007 um 14:26 schrieb Martin Aspeli:
However, surely, if we agree that it's premature to do so,
commenting out the line that sends a DeprecationWarning won't be
much of a change?
That's just plain silly! The warning is the best way of informing
developers: "explicit is better than implicit". I agree with Jens
that should go through the archive discussions on this which covered
compatability issue. Anyway third party developers should be aware of
and checking for the version for their dependencies (I'd like a
utility for this for CMF but that's another issue) so that Product X
can be categorised as working with CMF versions 1.6 and 2.0 but
perhaps not 2.1.
+1 to go ahead with Jens' branch.
I fully agree with this (going ahead with the work), it's just a
question of whether we want to fill people's error logs with warnings or
not. Perhaps we could start off at a lower error level for a version or two?
Changing every use of getToolByName() in every product out there
(especially Plone's third party products, of which there are hundreds)
is an enormous (and fairly daunting) task. If every request gets four or
five of those messages, it will be counter-productive, swamping the logs.
Similarly, if we did remove it too soon, the breakage would be enormous.
Probably so much so that Plone would need to monkey patch it back.
I completely agree that the "new way" is better. I just think we need to
be pragmatic about how strongly we warn that there is a new way, and how
quickly we remove the old way.
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests