-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 yuppie wrote: > Hi Tres! > > > Tres Seaver wrote: >> yuppie wrote: >> >>> But that code doesn't improve the non-purging mode. The changes Wichert >>> proposed make sense with or without the 'upgrade steps' feature. >> If we had the upgrade machinery in place, we could scrap non-purging >> mode altogether -- its purpose is to allow for "controlled" application >> of changes to existing configuration without full replacement. >> Wichert's rationale was specifically: >> >>> The particular reason I'm interested in this is that for Plone we are >>> playing with using GenricSetup profiles as part of the migration code. >>> This means we can write a lot less python code but just write changes >>> as profile snippets. > > Well. If we don't use the non-purging mode we can't write changes as > profile snippets. Should upgrade steps always be implemented in pure > Python without using any XML files?
I would say that the "execute-while-parse" model of our current profile import driver is wrong for upgrades, but it would be possible. The upgrade step could do the checking that a given "upgrade-only" extension should be imported, and then import it (perhaps passing 'no_purge' as a flag). Meanwhile, we would disable / remove any UI for setting that flag outside an upgrade. > BTW: Are there any unit tests for the upgrade steps feature? I'll defer to Rob: he was porting the code from the CPS add-on. >>> CMF 2.1 beta has some serious site manager issues. Please let's focus on >>> resolving these issues first. >> I'm really just lobbying to have the GS work tested and merged. Fixing >> ths LSM stuff is in the hands of a different set of folks, I think. >> Rob, how did stuff go at Sorrento? > > The CMF 2.1 branch is not as stable as it should be. Adding the 'upgrade > steps' feature might be low risk, but the other changes on the sprint > branch look more risky to me. I'm a bit afraid merging them will > destabilize the 2.1 branch further. I don't think so. The other changes split out the UI for setting the baseline profile (ordinarily done only at site creation) and showing available extensions. I think the cleanup there is highly unlikely to cause instability: the only change is that we no longer require (or even allow) people to set extension profiles as "faux" baselines in order to import them. Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v188.8.131.52 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGHApu+gerLs4ltQ4RAlqXAKCHYfNjz+2c3iYn7GaZ/kwgimYNUwCggMDM bb7izET8Lqq8MAHqARUdFTE= =MmTO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests