Re: [Plone-developers] experimental.broken - Graceful handling of broken interfaces and components in the ZODB
Malthe Borch <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.zope.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAAPh5FkMdk24cNqVU8Md6MVDsZm2=pg4ALd7f-cDSrbsrkh-kA@mail.gmail.com> |
On 7 November 2011 09:17, Ross Patterson <[email protected]> wrote: > The intention of this package is to see if the implementation of broken > object handling is correct and robust enough to merge into > zope.interface and zope.component themselves. Is this the right > approach? If not why and what would be better? How might this approach > be improved? (removed plone-dev from cc). Isn't it symptom treatment though? If you've got an add-on which adds marker interfaces to "general objects", shouldn't that add-on remove – or no longer provide – those same interfaces when it's uninstalled? At least in Plone, you can easily query content objects providing a particular set of interfaces. I think it's a non-goal to be able to run a system without all the required software – which is how I understand it when you just do a "hard remove" of an add-on without a prior "soft remove". \malthe _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - [email protected] https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )