> > Usually I am not fond of magic either, but from an user point of
> > view ("user" = someone who might write ZODB Python scripts using
> > PAS or
> > the like) I am used to have all changes to objects saved magically, so
> > why not user properties?
> This is true - if this were a normal persistent object. But that is
> only true with a few user folder implementations, like the bog-
> standard Zope user folder.
> For most user folder implementations the user object cannot counted
> as being persistent because it is assembled on the fly using data
> from external sources (RDBMS, LDAP, etc). It gets used once (or a few
> times if it bis cached internally for speeed) and then thrown away.
> Basically, the expectation you mention is unrealistic for most user
> folders out there.
Ok, got the point. As I said, I have been arguing from some (dummy?)
end-user perspective. I guess other users can figure out that user
objects are normally not the same as persistent objects, too.
If I put a developer hat on, I feel an explicit "saveProperties" call
or something like that is better, too - so sorry for the noise I created.
Zope-PAS mailing list