[Chris McDonough] |> Note that I don't have a strong opinion about this either way but I will > note that at least Zope 2's subclass of the "zodb" config handler will > need to continue to be willing to use the section title as the database > name for backwards compatibility reasons, as people who have older Zopes > will want to use their older config files (which have zodb_db sections > that have section titles, and no "database-name" key) with new Zope > releases.
Note that when you look at Zope2's zopeschema.xml's zodb_db config, there isn't a clue there that the section's name is used for something, let alone what it's used for. This lack of discoverability goes away when using an named key, and that's a better long-term place to be. I don't expect that adding an optional named key to <zodb> config will _stop_ <zodb_db> config from doing whatever it wants to do instead. If it does, I agree that would be a problem. _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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 )