Florent Guillaume wrote at 2005-11-29 15:32 +0100:
>I'm a bit peeved though at the lack of willingness from the few people that 
>have reimplemented their version of _setObject/_delObject (which could be 
>considered "private" APIs, seeing that they're prefixed with an underscore) 

All methods necessary to implement your own "ObjectManager" have
the "_" at the start. There is no official API allowing
to add new objects to an ObjectManager...

> ...
>This is supposed to be open source, can't we be reactive to change in such 

Why must "_setObject/_delObject" grow a new parameter "suppress_events"?
Where is it used for?

  Up to now, the methods  called "manage_afterAdd/manage_beforeDelete"
  indiscrimently -- without the need to suppress these calls
  (the predecessors of events).

  In the very few places where "manage_afterAdd/manage_beforeDelete"
  should behave specially, a specialized fake object was used.

  Can classes no longer control event creation (such that a
  parameter to "_setObject/_delObject" must be used to prevent
  normal (event generating behaviour).

>Are folks really going to ship their framework code with 
>_setObject unmodified from the current version when they ship it for Five 
>1.2 or Zope 2.9?

I am quite happy, when a single version of my "framework" works with
many Zope versions. I am even happier when nothing needs to be changed
for a new version (because it may take me quite a long time
before I/we accept a new Zope version and support it).

The following products installed here define their own

  *  "LocalFS"

  *  "PluggableAuthService"

  *  several private products (for versioning, temporary instance
     creation, "multi container")

Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to