-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 7 Jan 2007, at 23:09, Martin Aspeli wrote:
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?
A warning is a warning is a warning, there's no lower level, and
people won't see anything if it isn't in their faces. The usage of
something like a debug error message is unprecedented,
counterintuitive and will not compel anyone to fix their product. We
finally have a _workable_ deprecation policy with accepted ways to
signal deprecation and accepted deprecation periods, I'm against
creating special precedents for no other reason other than to give
anyone, be it Plone users or third party coders or anyone else, a
_false_ sense of security.
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.
The task isn't rocket science, it's just dull work. I know that
because I've spent a long time doing it on that branch. Besides, a
deprecation warning will only show up once for every specific call if
I remember correctly.
Keep in mind that the only tools which will cause the
DeprecationWarning to show are those defined in the CMF package. No
third-party "portal_foobar" tool would cause it.
Similarly, if we did remove it too soon, the breakage would be
enormous. Probably so much so that Plone would need to monkey patch
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.
If you consider the relatively glacial speed of CMF releases you'll
see there's nothing "quick" when the normal policy of removal two
releases down the line is applied. The earliest time getToolByName
could possible go away would be 2.3, and I strongly doubt it will
happen then. We will warn people that it *might* happen, though.
I do appreciate your desire to be conservative, but it's a bit hard
to understand when I hear so many voices from the upper echelon of
Plone developers wanting to completely revamp (for very good reasons)
large parts of it.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests