[Zope-CMF] Re: Modifications using GS profiles

[yuppie]

Hi Tres!


Tres Seaver wrote:
> yuppie wrote:
> 
>> But that code doesn't improve the non-purging mode. The changes Wichert 
>> proposed make sense with or without the 'upgrade steps' feature.
> 
> If we had the upgrade machinery in place, we could scrap non-purging
> mode altogether -- its purpose is to allow for "controlled" application
> of changes to existing configuration without full replacement.
> Wichert's rationale was specifically:
> 
>> The particular reason I'm interested in this is that for Plone we are
>> playing with using GenricSetup profiles as part of the migration code.
>> This means we can write a lot less python code but just write changes
>> as profile snippets.

Well. If we don't use the non-purging mode we can't write changes as 
profile snippets. Should upgrade steps always be implemented in pure 
Python without using any XML files?

BTW: Are there any unit tests for the upgrade steps feature?

>> CMF 2.1 beta has some serious site manager issues. Please let's focus on 
>> resolving these issues first.
> 
> I'm really just lobbying to have the GS work tested and merged.  Fixing
> ths LSM stuff is in the hands of a different set of folks, I think.
> Rob, how did stuff go at Sorrento?

The CMF 2.1 branch is not as stable as it should be. Adding the 'upgrade 
steps' feature might be low risk, but the other changes on the sprint 
branch look more risky to me. I'm a bit afraid merging them will 
destabilize the 2.1 branch further.


Cheers,

	Yuppie