Jim Fulton wrote:
> You were using? Or implementing?  Do you realize that these wern't
> actually being used and wern't implemented correctly?

Sorry, implementing, not using.

> (BTW, One of the reasons for doing this cleanup is to set the stage
>   for a decent savepoint implementation.)
>>> As a pragmatic matter, I'd avoid even importing the interfaces
>>> defined in ZODB, because they're still so inadequate and crude (as
>>> above, even ZODB mostly ignores them now).  ZODB was a very late
>>> starter in the interface game, and there's not enough resource to
>>> play intense "interface catchup" in that project -- this gets poked
>>> at in slow motion, by forcing it briefly from time to time at the
>>> expense of more urgent ZODB tasks.
>> I don't think this has anything to do with the ZODB.
> I'm afraid it does.  ZODB is in a somewhat uniquely bad
> state with regard to it's documentation and documented APIs.
> As we can steal little chunks of time, Tim and I (and recently
> Christian Theune) are trying to clean them up, but, as Tim says
> you shouldn't pay much attention to them at the moment.  I
> expect that in the not too distant future we'll be able to get
> them to a place where they are actually useful.

This is good to know -- I'll tread more carefully for the time being.

 -- Garrett
Zope3-dev mailing list
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to