zc.buildout: the extended-by option
Hi, the buildout section used to have an option named "extended-by" that has been deprecated for quite a while. The option is not (no longer?) present in documentation and tests and the only thing left of it is the implementation and a check that is supposed to result in a deprecation warning. However, there's a bug in the implementation that looks as if it was caused by some refactoring, which would cause a NameError to be raised instead of the deprecation warning being printed. To me, this looks as if it was safe to just remove any traces of the option, including the buggy implementation. The only downside would be that configurations which still use the option would fail silently instead of raising the NameError. I don't consider this to be of much importance in practice, but before going ahead and removing code, I wanted to give people a chance to disagree. Thank you. -- Thomas
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Thomas Lotze
Hi,
the buildout section used to have an option named "extended-by" that has been deprecated for quite a while. The option is not (no longer?) present in documentation and tests and the only thing left of it is the implementation and a check that is supposed to result in a deprecation warning. However, there's a bug in the implementation that looks as if it was caused by some refactoring, which would cause a NameError to be raised instead of the deprecation warning being printed.
To me, this looks as if it was safe to just remove any traces of the option, including the buggy implementation. The only downside would be that configurations which still use the option would fail silently instead of raising the NameError. I don't consider this to be of much importance in practice, but before going ahead and removing code, I wanted to give people a chance to disagree. Thank you.
+1 Perhaps add a check and raise an error if the option is present. Jim -- Jim Fulton http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimfulton
Jim Fulton wrote:
To me, this looks as if it was safe to just remove any traces of the option, including the buggy implementation. The only downside would be that configurations which still use the option would fail silently instead of raising the NameError. I don't consider this to be of much importance in practice, but before going ahead and removing code, I wanted to give people a chance to disagree. Thank you.
+1
Perhaps add a check and raise an error if the option is present.
I've just removed the remains of the option's implementation and added a check that raises a UserError if an extended-by option is still encountered in some buildout section. -- Thomas
participants (2)
-
Jim Fulton -
Thomas Lotze