Laurence Rowe wrote:
Now I see why you didn't propose named adapters. But I'm still not
happy with adapting (IContentish, basestring). Did you consider to
add getId() to IWorkflowDefinition and to adapt (IContentish,
Then I don't see how you would register adapter for a specific (TTW or
generic setup defined) workflow.
Perhaps a named adapter lookup falling back to a plain adapter lookup
is the best solution?
All the solutions you propose to solve this look a bit like a hack to me
- I guess because you want to use adapters for something they are not
designed for. AFAICT the default pattern for adapting specific objects
is to use marker interfaces.
Why do we need a different solution for workflows?
Because they have names already. At the moment an integrator can easily
set up workflows through the web and export a generic setup profile. I'd
like to preserve this way of working.
I'd like to enable the possibility of registering different adapters for
different workflows, but as far as I know there is no easy way of
importing/exporting marker interfaces attached to TTW workflows.
However the solution is a bit ugly, so I guess the best way forward is
making the modifications you suggest. A developer can then register an
adapter that performs named adapter lookups if s/he so wishes.
I'll create a branch and make the changes.
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests