On 6/22/07, Rob Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well. I'd prefer to have *one* obvious and explicit solution. The
> failover adds extra code that needs to be maintained and makes it less
> obvious where the version number comes from.

i agree.  i was thinking since my last reply that, since the code is already
in there, we could support a special value in the metadata.xml file that
explicitly tells GS to use the product version for the profile version, rather
than having that be the default behaviour.

I think that the profile version number typically should *not* be the
same as the version number. Quite often you make a release without
changing anything in the profile, and profiles may be just
configuration and then not have anything to do with any product
version. So I'd prefer if profile versions just aren't product
versions at all.

But it's not a strong  opinion.

> If it is pure registration information, why don't we extend the ZCML
> directive? But AFAICS data like the version number belongs to the
> profile itself and it might be useful to add timestamp based version
> numbers to exported profiles.

Sounds reasonable to me.


All in all, btw, these new feature to GenericSetup look bitchin', and
will make truly awseome! :-)

--
Lennart Regebro: Zope and Plone consulting.
http://www.colliberty.com/
+33 661 58 14 64
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to