-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Am 26.04.2009 um 18:16 schrieb Matthew Wilkes:
On 26 Apr 2009, at 16:53, Martin Aspeli wrote:
We can fix this by introducing some code in OFS (and BTreeFolder2) that mimics what zope.container does.
Is there any risk involved in this? It looks ok in theory, just that we're at a4 of Zope 2.12, we should be getting wary of features.
We have code for all three of these in plone.folder which could be pushed down to OFS an BTreeFolder2 quite easily.
plone.folder is GPL and owned by the Plone Foundation, BTreeFolder2 is ZPL and owned by the Zope Foundation and contributors. This sounds like "quite easily" from a copy-the-code point of view, but doesn't take account of legal issues. You'd need at least a PF board vote. I doubt the Plone foundation is a Zope contributor, and I'm not sure if their agreements would even be compatible, it may grant Zope Corp some rights that weren't granted to the PF
The License-Locked-In effect? Andreas -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAkn0jVUACgkQCJIWIbr9KYw6LwCgm2tdWpe2mHdZyobsb7mdSrgs JCYAoOUmoTtqTCVWqA/qHwwvsDxhnS/U =LNu3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----