[Zope-CMF] Re: CMFSetup profile extensions dependencies
yuppie
y.2005- at wcm-solutions.de
Thu Apr 7 03:41:04 EDT 2005
Hi Florent!
Florent Guillaume wrote:
> I'd like to discuss possible improvements to have profile extensions
> check some dependencies. This will require a way to express
> dependencies, which in the general case can be extremely complex -- but
> we probably don't need that.
> [...]
Just some general thoughts for now:
1.) In the long run, I'd like to get rid of preconfigured FTIs, tool
settings and DCWorkflow definitions. All of them should be replaced by
profile fragments. To avoid redundant profile data, bigger profiles like
'CMFDefault:default' should depend on these fragments.
Given the potential complexity of dependencies an XML file in the
profile directory might be a better place for these specifications.
2.) The current CMFSetup implementation merges the selected profiles.
You can't tell from the result which profiles it contains. Even if we
keep record of the used profiles - the specific combination and further
customizations may break working dependencies. So adding extensions
later based on dependencies would not work.
This means we either have to reload all dependencies if we add
extensions later or to limit the use cases to new site scenarios.
It might be useful to have a 'show all' option in the UI for adding new
sites that allows to combine arbitrary profiles. The specified
dependencies can just be a set of recommendations, advanced users need a
way to experiment with other combinations.
3.) I propose to use version numbers for profiles. And to use these
numbers or a range of numbers to specify dependencies.
Cheers,
Yuppie
More information about the Zope-CMF
mailing list