[PLIP-Advisories] Re: [Plone] #9319: Merging archetypes.fieldtraverser into Product.Archetypes

[plip-advisories at lists.plone.org]

#9319: Merging archetypes.fieldtraverser into Product.Archetypes
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
 Reporter:  thet                  |        Owner:     
     Type:  PLIP                  |       Status:  new
 Priority:  minor                 |    Milestone:  4.0
Component:  Archetypes            |   Resolution:     
 Keywords:  Archetypes, traverse  |  
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------

Comment(by raphael):

 I'm not sure everybody understands the motivation behind this PLIP. At
 least as I understand it the development of archetypes.fieldtraverser has
 been initiated by the fact that our current machinery does NOT work for
 binary data when using AnnotationStorage (AS). AS on the other hand has
 several advantages over todays default (AttributeStorage) like better
 performance, lower risk of name clashes, possibility to turn fields into
 properties (in the Python sense) etc.

 At least for those reasons I'm using archetypes.fieldtraverser today
 already myself.

 The fact that archetypes.fieldtraverser also adds an expanded convenience
 API might come in handy but I'd consider that secondary.

 Now, this could continue as an add-on but
 (1) it has to monkey patch Archetypes quite a bit and that should be
 avoided
 (2) it would let us move to AnnotationStorage as default storage for all
 field types - and don't tell me Archetypes is going to die any time soon
 ;-) It's used so much in the wild that it will continue even after Plone
 itself moved away from it if only through all those add-ons that will then
 pull it in as a dependency.

 Therefore, I'm +1 on this PLIP.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://dev.plone.org/old/plone/ticket/9319#comment:10>
Plone <http://plone.org>
Plone Content Management System