On 2/15/06, Jeff Shell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would prefer not. We've used resourceDirectory to support things
> like webcams. The image(s) uploaded by the cams might not always be
> there, but the containing path is. It's nice not having Zope start
> If it was sugar for a set of resource directives, this could easily
> fail out on us, unless it was making 'resource' items all the time
> whenever the directory's contents changed.
Right. In which case, another possibility would be to have a new
directive that really is just sugar as I described. That would avoid
backward compatibility problems and make the intention clear.
Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at gmail.com>
"There is no wealth but life." --John Ruskin
Zope3-dev mailing list