[Zope-CMF] Re: [dev] tools-as-utilities roadmap
Martin Aspeli
optilude at gmx.net
Fri Jul 6 20:01:37 EDT 2007
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
More information about the Zope-CMF
mailing list