I'm wondering if a group without members is something all together different, though.
The intention of a "group" is to be a set of members + content objects. James On Oct 20, 2009, at 3:02 PM, bobhaugen wrote: > > P.S. I'd also like to see the behaviors of base.Group refactored. > > That is, I want the behavior of having content objects and bridges to > be split off from having members, so that objects with no members can > have pluggable content objects and bridges. > > Seems simple, I can do it in my fork, but think it wd make sense for > groups/base. > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pinax Core Development" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pinax-core-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
