[Zope-CMF] Re: [dev] tools-as-utilities roadmap

[Martin Aspeli]

yuppie wrote:

> Well. The 2.1 changes are based one the assumption that we switch 
> quickly and completely to utilities, making all tools work as utilities. 
> The roadmap proposed by Tres means it will take several years and we'll 
> have to work with tools and utilities side by side for a long time.
> 
> 
> I can live with that approach, but would like to see CMF 2.1 adjusted:
> 
> 'getToolByInterfaceName' is a completely misleading method name if tools 
> will not become utilities. This method has no 'context' (or 'REQUEST') 
> argument, so it can't return tools. It returns utilities. 
> 'getUtilityByInterfaceName' would be a much better name for a 
> 'getUtility' replacement used in untrusted code.
> 
> I propose to run a search 'n' replace *before* the next beta.

I'm getting a bit lost in all the jumps back and forth now, but can I 
please ask (beg?) that the following stays true for CMF 2.1 at the very 
least:

  - getToolByName works as before, on all standard tools
  - getToolByName never spits deprecation warnings

I support a move to utilities and views (if they are true utilities and 
views, not just for the sake of "more Zope3ish syntax") in principle, 
but I've already converted a whole bunch of code to use getUtility and 
then had to convert it back to getToolByName.

I'm also in the position of writing documentation and issuing 
guidelines. A rule that says "X and Y are acquired using getToolByName, 
A, B and C you have to use getUtility" is just too arbitrary and 
confusing for most people.

Martin

-- 
Acquisition is a jealous mistress