[Seaside] Bug? in GOODS driver/implementation

Avi Bryant avi at beta4.com
Tue May 11 23:14:32 CEST 2004

On May 11, 2004, at 1:03 PM, Jason Dufair wrote:

> I think I have discovered a bug in the GOODS driver or implementation
> (not sure of the terminology)

I would call it the "GOODS client library".  The "implementation" 
implies the server to me.

> So the question is: is it by design that we cannot save classes to 
> or is it perhaps an oversight?  I can certainly re-factor so each
> instance does not hold on to a class, but I'm curious to know the 
> answer
> either way.  Thanks!

Interesting question.  It was mostly oversight, but I don't really know 
what semantics would be appropriate for saving classes - would you just 
want a stub object in there that recorded the class name, that would 
resolve to the actual class object when you loaded it in?  Or would you 
want to be serializing entire classes, method dictionaries  and all?  
If the latter, you end up sucking large portions of the image into the 
DB any time you commit a class, and you end up having one version of 
each class per connection to the DB - probably not what you want?  The 
former would be pretty simple, just needs someone to take the time to 
do it (it might also be good to look at DiskProxy and see if it made 
sense to reuse that).


More information about the Seaside mailing list