[Framework-Team] PLIP 20144

[Timo Stollenwerk]

Am 09.12.2014 um 11:16 schrieb Philip Bauer:
> Sorry, I can't join you beards tonight because I give a Plone Coding Dojo at the python-usergroup :)
> 
> 
> I'm absolutely ok with waiting until 5.1 to go fully-folderish if you think it is to risky now. A feature-freeze is also be a really good reason not to add any new features. 
> 
> Anyway I added information on speed and weight to https://dev.plone.org/ticket/20144. The short version: No problem.
> 
> If we don't go there now I'm still much in favor of keeping a optional folderish profile in the package (instead of pointing developers to collective.folderishtypes) because this way I can add a easy upgrade-step that migrates the from the folderish profile types to the default-types in p.a.c. once they are folderish without having to uninstall a package. 
> 
> The IFolderish-query problem that Jens raised might be a real problem. Although querying for IFolderish is actually wrong, instead you should query for is_folderish which respects INonStructuralFolder. Adding INonStructuralFolder to items depending on filter_content_types and allowed_content_types might be possible. We'd also have to reindex is_folderish on changing these two settings.
> 
> UX-Problems 'only' arise when people stop using folders and instead only use documents. Dylan has a point there:
> 1. You can no longer have Portlets only on the "frontpage" of a folder. Dylan is right in that we need a feature in portlets that allows portlets to be only registered to an item but not it's children.
> 
> 2. Same goes for sharing: You can only delegate permissions for the objects and its children, not only the object
> 
> 3. Default-pages: Folderish types that you can add content to cannot be made into default pages. This can for only be overridden by adding types to the setting default_page_types in site_properties.
> 
> @Timo: Why do we have three version of p.a.c that we support? As far as I can see we only have one. Do you mean ATContentTypes? 

plone.app.contenttypes branches: 1.0.x / 1.1.x / 1.2.x

A folderish branch (1.3.x) would be the fourth version. I don't think we
can just focus on the latest branch and ignore the rest.

Personally I still use the 1.0.x branch. Both 1.1.x and 1.2.x are still
in beta and I did not dare to use them in production yet (I tried 1.1.x
some time ago but gave up, mostly because I did not need any of the new
features).

Timo