[Zope-CMF] Re: GenericSetup ATContentTypes global_allow

[Raphael Ritz]

Tres Seaver schrieb:
[..]
>> The question is: how would you do that from an extension profile
>> without replicating the entire 'File' fti for just this little change?
> 
> Then you aren't making an "extension":  it is really a "base" profile in
> disguise, as you want to control types "outside" your profile's scope.
> I don't want to make it easy for "add-ons" to scribble on other people's
> types (although yuppie's suggestion would work):  the model here is that
> either you are configuring the site *as a whole*, or you are "extending"
> it by making "well-behaved" extensions to it.
> 

Fair enough; and I didn't want to imply that GS should support that
"the old way" or make it easy; all I was trying was to explain
Katja's question to Suresh - and missing the main point as yuppie
pointed out. ;-)

On the other hand I think Katja's question nicely illustrates that
many of us (including myself) don't have a very clear cut picture
yet as to when provide and use a base versus an extension profiles.
It might seem trivial at first glance but given what people sometimes
do in 3rd-party add-on installs today together with Hanno's work on
the quickinstaller for Plone with respect to GS support and me
currently "fixing/reviving" installTypes from Archetypes (we just
cannot possibly break about 400 Plone add-ons in Plone-3.0 because
of moving to CMF-2.x) ...

People, at least in the Plone community, are used to the
"download - install - test - uninstall" pattern when it comes
to third-party extensions which isn't quite what GS has been
designed for - I know. So there might be more questions ahead.
That's all.

Raphael

> 
> Tres.