[Framework-Team] Current PLIP status

Rob Miller ra at burningman.com
Sat Dec 10 07:04:48 UTC 2005


On Dec 9, 2005, at 6:47 PM, Alec Mitchell wrote:

> OK framework folks, here is a summary of the current state of  
> things as per
> our last discussion and some followup with the relevant devs.  I'd
> appreciate any additions or disagreements:
>
> PLIP #102: PlonePAS:
> 	Another mature third product that is in production use, and for  
> which the
> integration work is mostly done.  Enfold is standing behind the  
> product and
> it is apparently (nearly?) ready to merge.  The TODO list indicates  
> a few
> items that seem pretty important (role mapping, caching,  
> listMemberIds), and
> migration needs to be tested on a few reasonable sites.  A big  
> lingering
> question, what does this mean for CMFMember?

CMFMember will not work w/ PlonePAS, at all.  chances are that it  
never will.  my current thought is to write a new product, based on  
Membrane, that will replace CMFMember, providing a (hopefully  
ContentSetup-based) migration path forward.  i'm hoping to start  
working on this at the snow sprint.

> Does it matter?

i think it does.  there are quite a few folks out there using  
CMFMember, and this is going to be a show-stopper for all of them.  i  
think scrapping it and building a new product is the way to go, and i  
don't expect it to be terribly hard, but i'm not going to be able to  
do it alone.  RockyBurt and SashaV have already said they want to  
help, it'd be great if we could get a few more hands.

> PLIP #113: GenericSetup
> 	This appears to be in good shape, and while it's only a gradual  
> step towards
> a more reasonable migration and setup infrastructure, it is a very  
> important
> one.  The way that portal setup is performed on the branch  
> currently creates
> some undesirable dependencies (making it so that AT and ATCT tests  
> can't
> run).

i'm working on this now.

> The production of some GenericSetup usage documentation would be nice
> as well.

i'll get to that.

> With some cleanup this branch should be ready to merge soon.
> Would it be possible to convert ATCT to use GenericSetup as well  
> for this
> release?

ATCT is already using GenericSetup, sort of... the setup profile for  
Plone specifies explicitly what types should be in the types tool, so  
the ATCT types are instantiated and used from the get-go, w/o the  
need to do the ATCT installation migration process.  it would be nice  
to make this more complete, though.  we'll see.


-r




More information about the Framework-Team mailing list