Re: [Zope-CMF] Extending FTI.isConstructionAllowed
Hi Wichert! Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously yuppie wrote: >> 2.) The distinction between allowType() and isConstructionAllowed() was >> clear in CMF 2.1: allowType() checked a cheap, not permission related >> CMF specific restriction. isConstructionAllowed() checked generic >> permission related restictions. The new restrictions >> _checkWorkflowAllowed and ITypeConstructionFilter don't fit in one of >> these two categories. > > Is there a reason that the two have to be separate? I don't know the reasons, I just can guess. AFAICS it's not absolutely necessary, but using one method would require several changes. > What is the downside > of one call that does all necessary checks? These come to my mind: - You no longer can use TypeInformation.constructInstance to bypass the allowType() check. PortalFolderBase.invokeFactory checks allowType() before calling constructInstance. - You no longer can call CopyContainer._verifyObjectPaste from PortalFolderBase._verifyObjectPaste without performing redundant permission checks. - Actions have a similar distinction between 'available' and 'allowed'. The new 'add' actions in CMF 2.2 map allowType() and isConstructionAllowed() to 'available' and 'allowed' keys. >> allowType() and isConstructionAllowed() are both the wrong place for >> checking additional restrictions. But allowType() could become part of a >> more general precondition that could be checked by checkObject and a new >> checkPortalType (=CMF specific checkFactory) function. > > How do you see this working? If it's simple enough I might have enough > time to work on it this week. In CMF we would add a __setattr__.precondition to IFolderish, Plone folders would use a modified interface with a different precondition. The preconditions would implement an interface like this one: class IFolderishPrecondition(Interface): def __call__(container, name, object): """Test whether container setitem arguments are valid. Raise zope.interface.Invalid if the object is invalid. """ def portaltype(container, name, portaltype): """Test whether objects provided by the portal type are acceptable Return a boolean value. """ _verifyObjectPaste would use checkObject, other places where currently allowType() is used would use a new checkPortalType function. Does that make sense to you? Cheers, Yuppie ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
[Zope-CMF] CMF Tests: 7 OK
Summary of messages to the cmf-tests list. Period Wed Jun 3 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Thu Jun 4 12:00:00 2009 UTC. There were 7 messages: 7 from CMF Tests. Tests passed OK --- Subject: OK : CMF-2.1 Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: CMF Tests Date: Wed Jun 3 21:24:44 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2009-June/011582.html Subject: OK : CMF-2.1 Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: CMF Tests Date: Wed Jun 3 21:26:49 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2009-June/011583.html Subject: OK : CMF-trunk Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: CMF Tests Date: Wed Jun 3 21:28:54 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2009-June/011584.html Subject: OK : CMF-trunk Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: CMF Tests Date: Wed Jun 3 21:30:55 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2009-June/011585.html Subject: OK : CMF-trunk Zope-trunk Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: CMF Tests Date: Wed Jun 3 21:32:55 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2009-June/011586.html Subject: OK : CMF-trunk Zope-trunk Python-2.5.4 : Linux From: CMF Tests Date: Wed Jun 3 21:34:55 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2009-June/011587.html Subject: OK : CMF-trunk Zope-trunk Python-2.6.1 : Linux From: CMF Tests Date: Wed Jun 3 21:36:56 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2009-June/011588.html ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] Extending FTI.isConstructionAllowed
Previously yuppie wrote: > After (re)reading all the comments and having a closer look at the code > I came to these conclusions: > > 1.) CMF 2.1 checks two different restrictions: allowType() and > isConstructionAllowed(). PortalFolderBase._verifyObjectPaste just checks > allowType() because in CMF 2.1 isConstructionAllowed() does basically > the same permission check as CopyContainer._verifyObjectPaste. Changing > isConstructionAllowed() without changing > PortalFolderBase._verifyObjectPaste creates inconsistent behavior. The > _checkWorkflowAllowed change and your branch are both broken. That sounds like there is some opportunity for code sharing there. > 2.) The distinction between allowType() and isConstructionAllowed() was > clear in CMF 2.1: allowType() checked a cheap, not permission related > CMF specific restriction. isConstructionAllowed() checked generic > permission related restictions. The new restrictions > _checkWorkflowAllowed and ITypeConstructionFilter don't fit in one of > these two categories. Is there a reason that the two have to be separate? What is the downside of one call that does all necessary checks? > 3.) I was wrong about comparing isConstructionAllowed with checkFactory > and checkObject. These are used for checking general container > constraints, not for checking user specific permissions. checkFactory > doesn't work for CMF because it doesn't take the portal type as argument. Right. > My conclusion: > > allowType() and isConstructionAllowed() are both the wrong place for > checking additional restrictions. But allowType() could become part of a > more general precondition that could be checked by checkObject and a new > checkPortalType (=CMF specific checkFactory) function. How do you see this working? If it's simple enough I might have enough time to work on it this week. Wichert. -- Wichert Akkerman It is simple to make things. http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple. ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
