[Zope-CMF] Re: five.intid and DirectoryView

[Tres Seaver]

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

Martijn Pieters wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Ross Patterson <me at rpatterson.net> wrote:
>> "Martijn Pieters" <mj at zopatista.com> writes:
>>> But the code never does that. When cloning a file-based FSObject, a
>>> new instance is created and that is added to the ZODB. Noone else
>>> should do this either.
>> zope.app.keyreference does.  The persistence machinery doesn't add an
>> object to a connection until commit.  As such, an IPersistent and
>> IObjectAdded event handler, such as the one in zope.app.intid, that
>> needs the object to have a connection needs to add the object to a
>> connection.

Sounds like a bug in zope.app.intid to me:  it shouldn't be forcing
objects to have connections.

> Why is the IObjectAdded event fired at all? Perhaps that's the bug here.
> 
>> Shouldn't anything that implements IPersistent be able to be added to a
>> connection?  Wouldn't that be considered part of providing the
>> interface?  Where else is an object that provides IPersistent stored in
>> global state?
> 
> I assume it was easier at the time to use just one class. Perhaps this
> should be reconsidered now. However, just providing the IPersistence
> interface does not mean the object expects to be added to a connection
> arbitrarily.

Exactly.  Nobody is supposed to add objects to a connection except their
already-persisted containers.

- --
===================================================================
Tres Seaver          +1 540-429-0999          tseaver at palladion.com
Palladion Software   "Excellence by Design"    http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIZlfe+gerLs4ltQ4RAoGOAJ954hDazoOKVj7TZKJQX84wB0LRUwCgox23
rjY5Q3Xjhu+eDcVnmmzXdjs=
=pF+8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----