diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | CHANGES.txt | 27 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | docs/whatsnew-1.2.rst | 40 |
2 files changed, 67 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/CHANGES.txt b/CHANGES.txt index c752f8005..86ae8c49d 100644 --- a/CHANGES.txt +++ b/CHANGES.txt @@ -171,6 +171,33 @@ Backwards Incompatibilities instead make a separate call to the method for each callable. This change was introduced to support the ``route_prefix`` feature of include. +- It may be necessary to more strictly order configuration route and view + statements when using an "autocommitting" Configurator. In the past, it + was possible to add a view which named a route name before adding a route + with that name when you used an autocommitting configurator. For example:: + + config = Configurator(autocommit=True) + config.add_view('my.pkg.someview', route_name='foo') + config.add_route('foo', '/foo') + + The above will raise an exception when the view attempts to add itself. + Now you must add the route before adding the view:: + + config = Configurator(autocommit=True) + config.add_route('foo', '/foo') + config.add_view('my.pkg.someview', route_name='foo') + + This won't effect "normal" users, only people who have legacy BFG codebases + that used an autommitting configurator and possibly tests that use the + configurator API (the configurator returned by ``pyramid.testing.setUp`` is + an autocommitting configurator). The right way to get around this is to + use a non-autocommitting configurator (the default), which does not have + these directive ordering requirements. + +- The ``pyramid.config.Configurator.add_route`` directive no longer returns a + route object. This change was required to make route vs. view + configuration processing work properly. + Documentation ------------- diff --git a/docs/whatsnew-1.2.rst b/docs/whatsnew-1.2.rst index 9718a547c..c5a71e1ce 100644 --- a/docs/whatsnew-1.2.rst +++ b/docs/whatsnew-1.2.rst @@ -176,6 +176,46 @@ Backwards Incompatibilities :meth:`pyramid.config.Configurator.include`, it will break. You now must now instead make a separate call to the method for each callable. +- It may be necessary to more strictly order configuration route and view + statements when using an "autocommitting" :term:`Configurator`. In the + past, it was possible to add a view which named a route name before adding + a route with that name when you used an autocommitting configurator. For + example: + + .. code-block:: python + + config = Configurator(autocommit=True) + config.add_view('my.pkg.someview', route_name='foo') + config.add_route('foo', '/foo') + + The above will raise an exception when the view attempts to add itself. + Now you must add the route before adding the view: + + .. code-block:: python + + config = Configurator(autocommit=True) + config.add_route('foo', '/foo') + config.add_view('my.pkg.someview', route_name='foo') + + This won't effect "normal" users, only people who have legacy BFG codebases + that used an autommitting configurator and possibly tests that use the + configurator API (the configurator returned by + :func:`pyramid.testing.setUp` is an autocommitting configurator). The + right way to get around this is to use a default non-autocommitting + configurator, which does not have these directive ordering requirements: + + .. code-block:: python + + config = Configurator() + config.add_view('my.pkg.someview', route_name='foo') + config.add_route('foo', '/foo') + + The above will work fine. + +- The :meth:`pyramid.config.Configurator.add_route` directive no longer + returns a route object. This change was required to make route vs. view + configuration processing work properly. + Documentation Enhancements -------------------------- |