[Zope3-dev] RFC: __traceback_supplement__ versus __traceback_info__
Christian Theune
ct at gocept.com
Fri Jan 27 14:26:24 EST 2006
Hi,
somehow there is a mixup between using __traceback_supplement__ and
__traceback_info__.
In Zope 2, I'm used to use __traceback_info__. In Zope 3 it seems like
the exception formatters use __traceback_supplement__. However, quite
some code in Zope 3.2 uses __traceback_info__ still, and only a few
places (security checkers) use __traceback_supplement__.
This situation should be changed. Some options:
a) Only support __traceback_supplement__, drop __traceback_info__.
Update the corresponding Zope 3 code accordingly.
b) Move back to __traceback_info__ because it's the same way as in Zope
2. (Does this have compatibility implications for Five?) Update the code
in Zope 3 accordingly.
c) Support both schemes, just update the exception formatter.
I can do it anyway, but I'd like to know what is prerred.
Christian
--
gocept gmbh & co. kg - forsterstraße 29 - 06112 halle/saale - germany
www.gocept.com - ct at gocept.com - phone +49 345 122 9889 7 -
fax +49 345 122 9889 1 - zope and plone consulting and development
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope3-dev/attachments/20060127/6666c578/attachment.bin
More information about the Zope3-dev
mailing list