On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Hanno Schlichting <ha...@hannosch.eu>wrote:

> Hi.
> I'm not a representative of the Repoze project, so I'll just share my
> personal view.
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 9:23 PM, ken manheimer <ken.manhei...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > these seem to be likely questions if you're interested in adoption of
> > repoze.plone by the wider plone community.  please let me know if i'm
> > misunderstanding something basic, or if i've missed somewhere that covers
> > the issues...
> repoze.zope2 and .plone have been written largely by Agendaless for
> the KARL project. That project has gone through another iteration and
> nowadays uses repoze.bfg without any Plone instead. While there are
> some individual users of the repoze.plone approach, there's currently
> no driving party behind it anymore.

good to know!

Now it's perfectly possible to use most of the software with
> up-to-date versions of Zope2 and Plone, but this setup isn't
> particular well documented or explained anywhere. The entire stack is
> however production proven and there's no doubt about its quality.
> At this point I see repoze.zope2 / .plone as a prototype for a full
> WSGI integration into Zope2. It's likely not going to see major
> adoption in its current form. It's more likely that the lessons
> learned from this project will be merged back in some form into Zope2
> itself, providing it with an OOTB WSGI story. If everything goes well,
> I hope to see Plone have official WSGI support in the future. The
> timeline for that is probably Zope 2.13 or later and Plone 5.0 with a
> final release somewhere in 2011 or 2012. With such a long timeframe
> there's obviously lots of unknowns.

i'm getting the impression that you have a talent for understatement. :-)

through a happy accident, a search through my inbox for "repoze" turned up
shane hathaway's february 2009 zope.pipeline proposal.  it's very
illuminating.  it definitely helps me understand more about what all the
fuss is, and more of what's going on.

> In this situation it's up to every user to decide if the benefits of
> the WSGI approach outweigh the costs of going with a non-standard
> approach. As always you can make a difference by getting involved and
> driving this project forward yourself ;-)

another masterful understatement.

now, instead of just asking whether and how to use plone under wsgi, i'm
considering whether i should be looking at switching my focus to bfg, at
least for some projects.  while i'm thankful to better understand the
various projects, i'm a bit overwhelmed at the uncertainties in each
direction and division of attention necessary to keep all in sight!  tres
has often referred to the ironic chinese curse, "may you live in interesting
times" - these are interesting times, indeed, for a web application

it's clear i'm going to have to better formulate my goals, and examine the
options with specific purposes in mind.  while this all may sound like
(existential) complaining, the info is very helpful - thanks!!


Repoze-dev mailing list

Reply via email to