[Fwd: [Framework-Team] Re: PLIP 145/168 - Locking and iterate]

Raphael Ritz r.ritz at biologie.hu-berlin.de
Tue Nov 21 11:42:12 UTC 2006

[resending because my response originally went to Martin only
- sorry Martin, I'll try to pay closer attention to the
reply-to header in the future]


-------- Original-Nachricht --------
Betreff: [Framework-Team] Re: PLIP 145/168 - Locking and iterate
Referenzen: <ejoa22$mfc$2 at sea.gmane.org>

Martin Aspeli schrieb:
> 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.

Well, I still feel responsible for the locking part
- in the end its me who wrote Plip 145 ;-)
but I wonder whether this is still relevant at all.

Depending on how we integrate iterate - if we do so -
it could be that all we need is iterate's approach to
locking. If, on the other hand, we make staging optional
there would be a usecase for a locking mechnism as
Jeff and I have been exploring at the Archipelago sprint.

As others have pointed out already, we would then need
to support different locking policies or lock levels.
E.g., content that's "checked out via iterate" would
be treated according to iterate's policy (which mainly
means no (easy) lock stealing) while items editied
"in the traditional (TTW/TTP) way" would set WebDAV
locks that could potentially be easily removed by others
with editing rights.

The other issue not settled so far is how to deal with the
new "in-place edit" possiblities. Should we trigger locking
there as well and if so, should this be for all field/widget
types or just for TextFields or RichWidgets? Or should this
be TTW configurable???

Regarding the currently somewhat close ties of Jeff and
my locking approach to Archetypes which has correctly been
pointed out as a weakness here, can anyone suggest a better
alternative for where to put the firing of the "someone just
started working on me" event (meaning more appropriate than
'base_edit' or the AT widgets)?


More information about the Framework-Team mailing list