[Zope-CMF] Re: [CMF 2.1] FSPageTemplate & Unicode

[Jens Vagelpohl]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On 7 Jan 2007, at 14:26, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>> I'm getting a bit annoyed that things already decided back in   
>> September are now being questioned. Please go back and read the   
>> thread "Tools as local utilities", which you started,  
>> coincidentally.  I have spent days and days going down this route.  
>> This is a very  large piece of work and I took it over voluntarily  
>> because everyone  thought it was a good idea.
>
> I'm sorry if I caused offense; I am very, very happy that you  
> decided this was worth your time, and I think it will be a very  
> important stepping stone in making CMF 2.1+ better and easier to  
> integrate with.

You're not causing offense, I just feel like I'm in the typical  
customer situation where requirements and expectations change at the  
last minute. With the customer I have to grin and bear it, but for my  
spare time work I claim the luxury of yelling "party foul!".


> I didn't realise we would fully deprecate getToolByName() quite  
> yet, though. I must admit I haven't been following your checkins,  
> for lack of time (and since you're surely more qualified than me in  
> this work in any case).

The thread I pointed out clearly spells out the deprecation and the  
DeprecationWarning. I'm somewhat surprised how DeprecationWarnings  
are an issue. Clearly, in the past the Plone developer community  
hasn't been too concerned about DeprecationWarning messages.


> However, surely, if we agree that it's premature to do so,  
> commenting out the line that sends a DeprecationWarning won't be  
> much of a change?

I don't agree. I vote for keeping it in. There is no other obvious  
way to alert developers of this change. Besides, that's _the_ way  
deprecations have always been handled. Why should this one be different?

Anyway, I propose the following:

- - the tool work to make them less dependent on acquisition is a good  
idea, but it's out of scope for the part I volunteered for. Others  
are welcome to step forward.

- - I'll continue with the work the way I have been doing it so far,  
there's just a couple small tools left and invocations in Yvo's  
browser view classes.

- - I'll be happy to mark those places in the code where I had to  
manually wrap after a straight getUtility/queryUtility call so these  
places stand out as a reminder to do something about it.

- - *However*, I won't touch any more code until we have some consensus  
here.

Don't get me wrong, even if we come to a conclusion that spells  
"throw away the branch" or "rewrite it all" I don't care, I just want  
some final word and no more re-opening of discussions. Anything else  
is analysis paralysis and a waste of time.

jens

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFFoPpmRAx5nvEhZLIRAmyDAJ4gjFJsu8Qugx/Alaiv9yBNOoMo7gCeLk06
ay+/xnj0s2IKv5OsM01tLys=
=fVAO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----