On Thu, 2003-06-12 at 13:57, Chris Bruce wrote: > I am not to worried about process vs threads right now. > > My only concern is "rolling my own" security and stuff like that. I like > how Zope's security allows you to use different acl_users folder that > supports different authorizations--although I want groups. But on the > flip-side, one of the reasons I am reluctant about Zope is that anything I > do will only work in Zope. It is not very useable outside Zope. > > This is the one drawback about developing with python for web-apps compared > to Java right now. There are no real standards for developing/deploying > python web-apps and it almost always depends on what python app > server/apache mod that you use. I hate the fact that the Java community has > all these crazy "best practices" for developing web apps, however some > things are kinda cool about the servlet containers when it comes to standard > ways of defining security and uri mapping. The idea is really nice that you > can take a java .war file (web archive) and drop it into most any java app > server and it is ready to go. Then the admin can just modify some xml > files.
Personally I detest XML files -- the beauty of OO is when data is not exposed, just methods, and XML exposes data in an inflexible way. But the interchangability would be great. But you can make general, framework-neutral structures in Python -- they just don't *quite* integrate with the framework. You'll have to write per-framework code to glue it in (and make it feel more native). The exception is Zope, where you need to do lots of extra work, and where Zope objects aren't often useful in isolation -- but this is not true of any of the other Python frameworks. > I am not sure if it is good or bad to have some kind of standard > "container"? I wish developing python web-apps could run on most any python > app server. But after spending many years developing java apps, I can say > for sure that java is really dissappointing for developing web apps. But, I > think Webware has some great potential with plug-ins. I just wish there > were more of them! But that might be the way to go right now, developing > the Zope-like things that make it easy to build web-apps in Zope as plug-ins > for Webware. I would also like to see a standard "container". I don't think it even has to be terribly intrusive or conformist -- it just has to create request and response objects, and map those to some "resource", which would be somewhat more abstract than servlets. That model could support servlets, or procedural server pages (think ASP or PHP, rather than JSP, as in Spyce), or object publishing, like with Quixote, or templates, or whatever. Interface differences would be handled with adapters, something that Twisted and Zope people are working on. I was trying to pursue this kind of unification after PyCon, but I'm afraid I lost momentum, and actually writing code is much more satisfying than trying to organize stuff. I'd still like to pursue it, though. As far as plugins, yes, they offer some opportunities, but a lot of stuff can be created without any Webware integration at all -- Cheetah is an example of something written with Webware in mind, but with no dependencies. Then you might write a plugin to glue it together. I've been working on a component idea, for adding functionality to servlets -- a bit finer grained than plugins. It's in the Webware sandbox (webware-sandbox.sf.net), in ianbicking/Component, with a user authentication component as an example. I've also used it for (my still in heavy development) form processing toolkit, in FormEncode, also in the Sandbox. Ian ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: eBay Great deals on office technology -- on eBay now! Click here: http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/711-11697-6916-5 _______________________________________________ Webware-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss
