Florent Guillaume <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Unauthorized in getObject is out of the question, that would be new > >> behaviour. > > > > Well, in 2.8, new behaviour is expected, right? > > I really passionately believe that we should not be returnining None in > > Zope 2.8, and since 2.8 hasn't quite hit beta yet I'm very keen to see > > it fixed asap. > > > > Any objections? > > I'm ok for 2.8. I'll look at it.
Is everyone ok with returning - the object if it can be accessed - raise Unauthorized if it can't be accessed - raise NotFound if it's not there and never return None ? I'll change that before tomorrow, for 2.8a2. (I'll change NotFound in Traversal.py to a real exception instead of a string too, I thought we'd killed those.) Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) CTO, Director of R&D +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - [email protected] http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
