--On 16. Januar 2006 13:36:32 -0500 Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There are two separate issues here: 1. ZPT backward compatibility. Are we introdcuting ZPT backward incompatibilities? (Aside from module paths)?
My original implementation would introduce incompatibilities definitely.However I've just checked in a relaxed implementation that defaults to the current behaviour. Enforcing unicode is now an optinal feature which might be used for application that are interested to use unicode for ZPTs starting Zope 2.10.
If so, then I think we need to have a proposal. (Maybe you already made one and I wasn't paying attention. I don't see one at: http://www.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/FrontPage.
Well, I brought this issue up on zope-dev to discuss this issue directly.but with almost zero feedback :-) Also another related posting to zope-zpt got _zero_ anwers. Also other changes happened are part of a (pending) proposal written by Philipp.
2. If we decide to change something, even if it's backward incompatible, we need to change Zope itself to do things the new way before we expect other people to and before we introduce the deprecation warning.
Nothing else happened so far (except the issue with OFS.content_types in Zope 2.9. I just forgot to change the code for the 2.9 final release. There was something to hinder me from doing that for 2.9b2).
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 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 )