2009/2/10 Stephan Richter <srichter@cosmos.phy.tufts.edu>:
On Monday 09 February 2009, Dan Korostelev wrote:
FileWidget - It doesn't clear the bytes value if no new file is uploaded now, which is nice. But there's also should be a way to clear current value if the field is not required. I've added that to the TODOS.txt. I think that should be done before release to make the widget actually functional out of box.
Since this feature has not been there before, I can live without it for the 2.0 release.
Well, if that will be the only issue left, I'm personally also fine with releasing without it :))
However, there was some backward-incompatible refactorings (class renames) done to sequence data converters that breaks the z3c.pt benchmarking suite. This may also break end-users' code so we probably want to fix the compatibility.
Yeah, let's fix that.
I'll check that.
Tests - All are passing.
Clearly, all testsshould be passing. In addition, I would really like to see 100% test coverage after taking the false positives into consideration.
Ok, the fix for the "z3c.ptcompat merge break" was to provide a zope.testing.doctest as a doctest module for testing.OutputChecker, so all tests pass again. They are also mostly 100% covered. Most uncovered bits are in the ObjectWidget, MultiWidget and its combination. So those modules defenitely need a review. :-)
If translations are not updated until the next release, 2.1.0 or 2.0.1, that's fine with me.
Well, that's actually fine with me as well (as I've already updated my translation :-P), so that was a call for people who wants to get their translations ready for 2.0.0.
One more thing I'd like to do is to add "klass" and "id" to the forms themselves so one could easily customize the visual appeal of the forms. But it's probably should be done in z3c.formui's subclasses and not in z3c.form's base classes. I'd like to hear the community opinion on that though.
All nice to have. :-) I would not block the release because of it.
That's fine with me to do that for the next release. BTW, I just discovered that forms have the "id" attribute, but it really points to the "name" which is a read-only property based on prefix, so they are not customizable at all. Was that done on purpose? I'd just set those attributes in the `update` method of the form. What do you think? -- WBR, Dan Korostelev