[Zope-CMF] Re: backporting GenericSetup to CMF-1.5

[Alec Mitchell]

On Sunday 13 November 2005 05:21 am, Florent Guillaume wrote:
> Rob Miller wrote:
> > Florent Guillaume wrote:
> >> +1 on branching CMF 1.6 soon, with the goal of:
> >>   - dropping support for Zope 2.7
> >>   - allowing Five 1.2 events activated  to work, even if it doesn't
> >> *require* Five 1.2 events
> >>   - be closer to CMF 2.0 w.r.t. setup.
> >
> > this is perfect for us.  there doesn't really need to be any work done
> > to allow the Five 1.2 event support, right?  this comes just by virtue
> > of dropping 2.7 support?  want to make sure we don't drift too far from
> > tres's proposed scope, to ease maintenance.
>
> To repost an earlier mail:
> > The patch I propose to include is:
> > http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-checkins/2005-November/007137.html
> >
> > Could some Plone folks please test that switching to
> > CMF/branches/efge-1.5-five-compatible instead of CMF/branches/1.5
> > doesn't cause problems in Plone ? This patch just changes the order of
> > base class for File and Image, and to do the CMFCatalogAware recursion
> > it calls its base class instead of redoing it by hand.
>
> It *has* to be tested for Plone, as I have no idea what Plone does w.r.t
> CMFCatalogAware monkey-patching.

Plone does no monkey-patching of CMFCatalogAware.  AT's CatalogMultiplex 
subclasses CMFCatalogAware, to allow reindexing in multiple catalogs.  It 
doesn't touch any of the manage_after* methods except manage_afterClone, 
which calls CMFCatalogAware.manage_afterClone directly (i.e. without super).  
The AT base classes in turn define manage_after* methods which call 
CatalogMultiplex.manage_after* directly (again without super).  My 
understanding is that having these subclasses which don't use super could 
result in multiple calls to some baseclass methods, so that AT would end up 
with even more excess reindex calls than it already has.  Additionally some 
3rd-party products (in my sandbox only CMFBoard) make direct calls to 
CatalogMultiplex.manage_after*.  Those are the only potential issues I'm 
seeing with regard to those changes in the products I have installed 
locally.

Alec