On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Chris McDonough <chr...@plope.com> wrote:

> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 11:57 PM, ken manheimer <ken.manhei...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> i'm getting the impression that you have a talent for understatement. :-)
>>>
>>
>> Yeah. People keep telling me that, no idea why :)
>>
>>  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 the end the handling of a request/response and the notion of
>> publishing is on of the core parts of our web frameworks. For a long
>> time we had relative stability in that area, with ZPublisher and
>> zope.publisher being the only two options. Today there's repoze.zope2,
>> repoze.bfg, bobo, the zope.pipeline proposal all trying to improve in
>> that area. But these are technology innovations only usable in their
>> respective frameworks. Unless you want to work on improving the
>> publishing story yourself, you can largely ignore these debates and
>> stick with whatever each tool gives you. Nobody can tell if we are
>> going to diverge further or if ideas will converge again at some
>> point.
>>
>
> For the record, Shane indicated to me earlier this year that he doesn't
> intend to see zope.pipeline to its logical conclusion; instead, when it
> makes sense, he'll pull features out of Zope and into middleware when those
> components can be used independent of the rest of the Zope stack.
>

interesting.  the perspective in his proposal on the zope plumbing is still
mighty informative, at least for someone as marginally informed as i am, and
it is good to know i shouldn't expect zope.pipeline, per se.


>  tres has often referred to the ironic chinese curse, "may you live in
>> interesting
>> times" - these are interesting times, indeed, for a web application
>> developer.
>>
>
> Yes, they are. Zope has switched from being one or two major projects
> into a whole landscape of different options going in all kinds of
> different directions at lots of different levels. You have to evaluate
> these tools independently and see how each one does for the job you
> have in mind.
>

> I think there are only three true Zopey options at the moment for
>  application integrators: Zope2/Plone, Grok, or BFG.  All the other stuff
> (like Zope3, repoze.zope2, etc.) are more or less either just libraries or
> promising thought experiments, and integrators should ignore them.
>

that's helpful.  as i mentioned in my previous posting, the accommodation of
bfg on google's app
engine<http://docs.repoze.org/bfg/current/tutorials/gae/index.html>is
especially interesting as a prospective resource for as a "glue" for
other resources...
-- 
ken
http://myriadicity.net
_______________________________________________
Repoze-dev mailing list
Repoze-dev@lists.repoze.org
http://lists.repoze.org/listinfo/repoze-dev

Reply via email to