Am 23.02.2007 um 12:52 schrieb Tres Seaver:
Hmm, I won't quibble about "migration code". +1.
+1 me neither
For registering the tools as utilities you still need to run the
componentregistry import step. I would not use on-the-fly magic
for that
part, I think people should do that explicitly.
If the code which *used* to work using 'getToolByName' now breaks
beofre
that step is done, then we have a problem. If there is a clear,
simple
step to perform after upgrade, then we should be OK.
I thought Jens had written it so nothing breaks?
E.g., we might tell folks to do something like:
$ cd $INSTANCE_HOME
$ ./bin/zopectl run Products/CMFCore/scripts/updateSites foo bar/baz
To upgrade the 'foo', and 'bar/baz' site objects. I see no benefit to
trying to do any migration from within the ZMI here.
Me neither. I guess that CMF users can be expected to work in the
file system.
It is probably just me on this list but I would appreciate a list of
the changes in the architecture with particular reference to what is
likely to break or will need changing. So far I've picked up on
yuppie's stuff to support views and Jens' work on utilities. Off hand
I wouldn't expect those changes to break existing sites.
I'm planning to do some work on the CMF next week, even using the svn
version, which as Jens noted, is not what many people are likely to
do. And now that I've got Phil's book I'll start working in a more
Zope 3 kind of way.
Charlie
--
Charlie Clark
Helmholtzstr. 20
Düsseldorf
D- 40215
Tel: +49-211-938-5360
GSM: +49-178-782-6226
_______________________________________________
Zope-CMF maillist - [email protected]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf
See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests
