Chris McDonough <chrism@digicool.com> wrote:
I actually think this about sums it up. If you have time to look at it Toby, it would be much appreciated. I don't think it's a very complicated set of fixes, its just not on the radar at the moment, and might require some thought about backwards-compatibility.
Not a patch, but Ive fixed all three known CatalogAware problems in a separate product; a new base class that derives from CatalogAware: http://www.zope.org/Members/htrd/BetterCatalogAware/ The techniques used in this product have been thoroughly stressed in several other production systems, but this is the first time they have been collected together in one place so bugs are possible.
That makes CatalogAware much saner and will produce less bloat. Actually, maybe I should just go make that change in the trunk and the 2.4 branch, although I'm a little afraid of what (if anything) it will break for everybody. To be honest, I really don't have much time to spend thinking about this, and my fears are probably just FUD.
Im not sure how many people are using CatalogAware; I think many serious users have been scared off by the problem reports in the list archives. IMO fixing this may be worth a little breakage. Toby Dickenson tdickenson@geminidataloggers.com