Hi there, Jim Fulton wrote: [snip]
I think we're talking about 2 different things.
There is the registry that is "local" to the root object and that is stored in the database. Having registration data in the database makes sense for a number of reasons and I don't consider this advanced. This is effectively a global registry. It doesn't really matter that it is attached to the root folder.
Then there are registries sprinkled around the object tree below the root. These are truly local, because they pertain to a subset of the object tree. This is the usage that I think we should relegate to an advanced feature and rethink the goals for. Most importantly, IMO, we should avoid having this advanced usage complicate the lives of 98% of developers who don't need it.
So if I understand you correctly, when you say 'root' you're talking about the ZODB root, not a particular application's root? And you're suggesting there be only a single db-dependent registry in the ZODB as the basic use case, and that people can register object in the ZODB into that registry? I'm not sure how this simplifies matters very much compared to the current API, which isn't all that complicated in my experience. The one thing I can see is that 'setSite' and traversal hooks could potentially go away. Is that what you're thinking about? Regards, Martijn