[Framework-Team] Re: PLIP 168 feedback (and fixes) was Re: Re: PLIP review overview
Martin Aspeli
optilude at gmx.net
Sun Nov 19 00:55:30 UTC 2006
Tom Lazar wrote:
> hi guys,
>
> i've been doing some work with iterate for a project here and wanted to
> report back, as some of the issues raised here came up for me, too. for
> compatability reasons i've been working with the `0.3-plone-2.1-2.5`
> branch, but kapil has already incorporated some of my fixes into trunk.
>
> On Oct 5, 2006, at 6:51 PM, Alexander Limi wrote:
>
>> I was working with a customer, deploying iterate and CMFEditions
>> earlier this week, and found it very impressive. I did make the
>> following notes of things I'd like to see fixed:
>>
>> - Product is not reinstallable (it complains that lock_info already
>> exists in the catalog)
>
> fixed (and in trunk) with http://plone.org/products/iterate/issues/3
>
>> - When viewing folder_contents, I get an error about the lock icon not
>> being available
>
> fixed (and in trunk) with http://plone.org/products/iterate/issues/9
>>
>> - There is not enough security granularity to grant only CheckOut, but
>> not CheckIn
>
> fixed on my local branch (and submitted as patch) with
> http://plone.org/products/iterate/issues/14/
>
> there is still one issue that needs to be addressed IMHO. i've also
> filed an issue for that:
>
> http://plone.org/products/iterate/issues/10
>
> basically, it means that references to children of an iterated folderish
> object are broken after that object is iterated. kapil has postponed
> that issue and i can understand that that's a really tough cookie to
> solve generically but this somehow needs to be addressed if we want to
> ship plone with iterate! if we can't fix the issue we should at least
> prevent a COCI-cycle for folderish objects that contain children with
> backreferences. any other suggestions?
>
> other than that iterate has been great fun to work and play with! i
> found its code to be very clean and and readable and has otherwise
> proven rocksolid here. if the above issue is addressed i absolutely
> recommend its inclusion in 3.0
Thanks for the testimonial and the fixes, Tom - this stuff is really,
really valuable.
Speaking of which, is anyone picking up the Locking vs. iterate
situation? As I recall, they need a little bit of syncing before they
can happily co-exist, though Alec seemed to think the changes wouldn't
be that hard.
Martin
More information about the Framework-Team
mailing list