[Checkins] SVN: zope.component/branches/wosc-test-stacking/NOTES.txt Update todo list

[Wolfgang Schnerring]

Log message for revision 121730:
  Update todo list
  

Changed:
  U   zope.component/branches/wosc-test-stacking/NOTES.txt

-=-
Modified: zope.component/branches/wosc-test-stacking/NOTES.txt
===================================================================
--- zope.component/branches/wosc-test-stacking/NOTES.txt	2011-05-19 06:46:02 UTC (rev 121729)
+++ zope.component/branches/wosc-test-stacking/NOTES.txt	2011-05-19 07:00:10 UTC (rev 121730)
@@ -1,16 +1,12 @@
 TODO:
 
 
-- Tests for zope.component-Stacking
-  Registry-Object: new registration, delete, view old, bases chain
-  getGlobalSiteManager()
-  getSiteManager / setSite
+- persisting/pickling stackable registries
 
-    - stackable.reset() needs to take into account "dying" stackables
+- Tests for zope.component-Stacking: can we run the existing tests on a push
+  and then pop "level"? (Maybe use another existing application as a
+  cross-check, too).
 
-    - Do we have to make _v_subregistries stackable?
-
-
 - zope.interface uses C-code for some parts. Is it a performance problem that
   'stackable' is Python-code? (This should only apply to tests, since we're
   going to want to create a way to bypass the stackable stuff)
@@ -19,8 +15,16 @@
 - Needs a better name
 - Create separate egg?
 
+- stackable.reset() needs to take into account "dying" stackables
+
 - don't create a new class object for each stackable() call
 - prettier class name, repr, etc.
 
 - have a name or "stack context", so you can say push('zope.component')
-- do we leak memory since we never unregister stackables?
+- do we leak memory regarding unregistering of stackables?
+
+
+
+* later
+- Do we have to make _v_subregistries stackable, i.e. do we want/need to
+  support changing __bases__ and restoring that after pop?