[Zope-dev] Speaking of 2.6...
Mario Valente
mvalente@ruido-visual.pt
Tue, 09 Apr 2002 19:06:47 +0100
At 13:47 09-04-2002 -0400, Brian Lloyd wrote:
>...I sent out a note a while ago now trying to scare up
>some ideas on how to vet the current list of 2.6 proposals
>and get to a final "plan". I didn't get much (any?) response :(
>
>But there are still a lot of things on the proposed features
>that are undone, and some that are controversial enough that
>we need to get to closure on them.
>
>Committed - Y/N whether the volunteers have committed to have
> the implementation and docs done by the first week
>Vetted - Y / N whether the community and / or the relevant BDFLs
> have come to some agreement on whether it *should* be
> done. The list of items without a 'Y' will be our next
Hi:
Both me and Myroslav Opyr <myroslav@zope.net.ua> are quite
commited to do the proposed "Object Links/References". Although
from the emails we exchanged with you, I would've guessed that
it was one of the "controversial enough" to be a Vetted item :-)
Anyways I'm commited to do it. I do agree with your argument about
link semantics but, at least for me, a link/reference is a link, and the
semantics are perfectly defined i.e its not a RedirectObject.
As in Unix, a hard link has different semantics from a soft link. I'm
thinking of the "hard link" semantics.
C U!
-- Mario Valente