Avi Bryant wrote:
>Just a few assorted Seaside-related things that have been on my mind
>(I guess if there was a Seaside blog, these would be postings
>there...).
>
>[snip]
>
>
>- Does anyone actually use, or understand, the full generality of the
>configuration framework from 2.5? I was recently using a 2.3 app and
>remembered how relatively simple and friendly the config pages for
>apps were. What would people think about a re-simplification, keeping
>some aspects of the 2.5 config (like the ability to define
>SystemConfigurations, with default values, in code, and add these to
>deployed app instances), but removing some of the more baroque parts
>(like the inheritance structure for configurations, and the idea of
>"site defaults" as an extra layer between the code defaults and the
>individual apps)?
>
>
Sounds fine to me. I use the configuration support a lot but have never
had need for either its inheritance model or the site defaults.
>- Mostly, when fixes have come in, I've been integrating them with the
>2.6a branch but not backporting them to 2.5. How important is it to
>do that backporting, and is there anyone that wants to take it on? In
>general, I feel like I could use some help with release management
>tasks like bug tracking and integration.
>
>
How long are we talking about maintaining 2.5? I'd be happy to take
this job for a year or until some period after 2.6 is released (maybe
six months), whichever comes later ;-)
David
|
