[Framework-Team] Some preliminary Plone 3.0 profiling results

Alexander Limi limi at plone.org
Tue Nov 14 15:18:48 UTC 2006


Sorry for the fragmented responses, I really need to go to bed soon :)

On 11/14/06, Martin Aspeli <optilude at gmx.net> wrote:
> The contentmenu customisations will have broken with every Plone
> version before, and it's a somewhat silly thing to have expected
> customisations to such a complex and convoluted template to survive
> version upgrades. For this one, it'd actually be quite easy to have a
> deprecated backwards compatible main_template (instead of pulling the
> plone.contentmenu content provider in main_template, do it in
> global_contentmenu and reference that from main_template - this makes
> global_contentmenu essentially a dummy), but for the portlets, it'd be
> harder.

Yes — the portlet fallback case is fine, since Plone will be fast
out-of-the-box (presumably), and performance penalty will only incur
if you use old-style portlets. This is exactly the same approach as I
want for the other templates like contentmenu — if you provide a
fallback, it's something you can do, but don't keep people that have
updated products/instances hostage just because you want to be
backwards compatible for another version.

Again, I want to stress that this is about removing hooks that have
*better alternatives that work*, not about mindlessly
removing/deprecating anything that might be suboptimal
performance-wise.

:)

— Alexander


More information about the Framework-Team mailing list