Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
We are agree that include FileSystemStorage and AttachmentField in thecore is not a good idea. We thought to include them in Plone bundle but the better way is perhaps to put them in Archetypes bundleThat's Nouri's turf, so ask him. >> It's my feeling that writing and promoting a good how-to on the issue>> including how people can deal with this right now (including Plone 2.1.x>> and above) would be more valuable than actually getting this into the >> core.>> +10>> I've asked, believe me. :)We can do this.That'd be great! Another thing to explore - I believe ATCT currently has some conditional stuff to use ExternalStorage for ATFile if it is available and switched on. It's possible that we could make this kind of a switch for FileSystemStorage *if* it's transparent and *if* it works with FSS not installed. An alternative would be to have a product that is dead-simple derivation from ATFile like:class ExternalFile(ATFile): schema = ATFile.schema schema['file'].storage = FileSystemStorage() meta_type = 'External File' portal_type = 'External File' archetype_name = 'File'with an install script that turns off global_allow for File and turns it on for ExternalFile instead.Martin ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
Martin Aspeli a écrit : > Raphael Ritz wrote: >> Alec Mitchell schrieb: >>> On 9/1/06, Alexander Limi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [..] While I think what you are doing is great, it feels like the wrong layer to solve it at when it comes to embedding something in the core. >>> >>> +1 to holding off on this (though like limi's, my vote doesn't count >>> for much) >> and I agree with both of you as BLOB support is landing in ZODB/Zope2/3 >> more or less right now (if I understood Jim correctly it's scheduled for >> Zope 3.4). > > +1 We are agree that include FileSystemStorage and AttachmentField in the core is not a good idea. We thought to include them in Plone bundle but the better way is perhaps to put them in Archetypes bundle. >> It's my feeling that writing and promoting a good how-to on the issue >> including how people can deal with this right now (including Plone 2.1.x >> and above) would be more valuable than actually getting this into the >> core. > > +10 > > I've asked, believe me. :) We can do this. Best regards, -- Encolpe Degoute INGENIWEB (TM) - S.A.S 5 Euros - RC B 438 725 632 17 rue Louise Michel - 92300 Levallois Perret - France web : www.ingeniweb.com - « les Services Web Ingénieux » ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
Raphael Ritz wrote: Alec Mitchell schrieb: On 9/1/06, Alexander Limi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [..] While I think what you are doing is great, it feels like the wrong layer to solve it at when it comes to embedding something in the core. +1 to holding off on this (though like limi's, my vote doesn't count for much) and I agree with both of you as BLOB support is landing in ZODB/Zope2/3 more or less right now (if I understood Jim correctly it's scheduled for Zope 3.4). +1 It's my feeling that writing and promoting a good how-to on the issue including how people can deal with this right now (including Plone 2.1.x and above) would be more valuable than actually getting this into the core. +10 I've asked, believe me. :) ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
Alec Mitchell schrieb: On 9/1/06, Alexander Limi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [..] While I think what you are doing is great, it feels like the wrong layer to solve it at when it comes to embedding something in the core. +1 to holding off on this (though like limi's, my vote doesn't count for much) and I agree with both of you as BLOB support is landing in ZODB/Zope2/3 more or less right now (if I understood Jim correctly it's scheduled for Zope 3.4). It's my feeling that writing and promoting a good how-to on the issue including how people can deal with this right now (including Plone 2.1.x and above) would be more valuable than actually getting this into the core. Just my 2 cents. Raphael Alec ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
On 9/1/06, Alexander Limi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 10:52:21 -0700, Encolpe Degoute <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Our team wishes to highlight PLIP 154 as we think it is nearly > implemented by FileSystemStorage + AttachmentField (still SVN). By the time Plone 3.5 ships, it's highly likely that Zope has proper BLOB support, and this will no longer be an issue. Zope 2.11 (the current target) may even have a beta out by the time we ship our first betas, and depending on the changes, we could possibly support both Zope 2.10 and Zope 2.11 - we have been able to support two zope releases in all our releases since Plone 2.0 so far. While I think what you are doing is great, it feels like the wrong layer to solve it at when it comes to embedding something in the core. +1 to holding off on this (though like limi's, my vote doesn't count for much) Alec ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 10:52:21 -0700, Encolpe Degoute <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Our team wishes to highlight PLIP 154 as we think it is nearly implemented by FileSystemStorage + AttachmentField (still SVN). By the time Plone 3.5 ships, it's highly likely that Zope has proper BLOB support, and this will no longer be an issue. Zope 2.11 (the current target) may even have a beta out by the time we ship our first betas, and depending on the changes, we could possibly support both Zope 2.10 and Zope 2.11 - we have been able to support two zope releases in all our releases since Plone 2.0 so far. While I think what you are doing is great, it feels like the wrong layer to solve it at when it comes to embedding something in the core. -- _ Alexander Limi · Chief Architect · Plone Solutions · Norway Consulting · Training · Development · http://www.plonesolutions.com _ Plone Co-Founder · http://plone.org · Connecting Content Plone Foundation · http://plone.org/foundation · Protecting Plone ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
Hanno Schlichting wrote: Thx for these suggestions, as my time is currently a bit limited, I didn't have time to go through these in detail yet :( Hanno - ? PLIP 142 - Componentise the global content menu ? PLIP 173 - OpenID support This from memory that Hanno knows the insides of PAS, if not, perhaps Tesdal would be better suited, but then he may have quite a lot on his hands? I'm happy with these. While I don't have a deep understanding of PAS internals yet, I trust wiggy has written some very well readable code, as this should be the basis for a tutorial ;) If it is not, I'll have to ask some more questions and get some third and forth opinions... After all this should only be one additional plug-in, not some grand scale rewrite. Okay, great. :) The content menu stuff is probably in good shape too, the only problem I can foresee is some overly complex design... ;) Oi! :) Feel free to grab me any time to discuss it. Martin ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
Hi all. Martin Aspeli wrote: > Hi guys, > > I took a look at the PLIPs still remaining. I put some preliminary > names to some of PLIPs, purely along the lines that I thought people > may be interested in. All the ones with "?" in front of them are just > suggestions - the other ones are the ones Wiggy, Raphael and I said we > were interested in grabbing. Thx for these suggestions, as my time is currently a bit limited, I didn't have time to go through these in detail yet :( > Hanno > - > ? PLIP 142 - Componentise the global content menu > ? PLIP 173 - OpenID support > > This from memory that Hanno knows the insides of PAS, if not, perhaps > Tesdal would be better suited, but then he may have quite a lot on his > hands? I'm happy with these. While I don't have a deep understanding of PAS internals yet, I trust wiggy has written some very well readable code, as this should be the basis for a tutorial ;) If it is not, I'll have to ask some more questions and get some third and forth opinions... After all this should only be one additional plug-in, not some grand scale rewrite. The content menu stuff is probably in good shape too, the only problem I can foresee is some overly complex design... ;) /me goes back to fix his submitted bundles Best wishes, Hanno ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
you might announce who is coordinate review on what bundles to plone-dev and encourage people to sign up. as a non-voter, I'll volunteer to review 3 bundles. anything but the wiki bundle. First come first serve. sign me up. -w Martin Aspeli wrote: Helge Tesdal wrote: On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:31:19 +0200, Martin Aspeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Glad you feel that way, I don't want to be seen to tell people what to do! Personally, though, I prefer to get a bit of a nudge rather than have to do all the leg work myself (and I was in need of a distraction). Nudge is good. Do we keep the list somewhere else than in mails? Like on plone.org or in SVN? Once people agree, I'll put it in svn, in the review directory. Martin ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
Helge Tesdal wrote: On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:31:19 +0200, Martin Aspeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Glad you feel that way, I don't want to be seen to tell people what to do! Personally, though, I prefer to get a bit of a nudge rather than have to do all the leg work myself (and I was in need of a distraction). Nudge is good. Do we keep the list somewhere else than in mails? Like on plone.org or in SVN? Once people agree, I'll put it in svn, in the review directory. Martin ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:31:19 +0200, Martin Aspeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Glad you feel that way, I don't want to be seen to tell people what to do! Personally, though, I prefer to get a bit of a nudge rather than have to do all the leg work myself (and I was in need of a distraction). Nudge is good. Do we keep the list somewhere else than in mails? Like on plone.org or in SVN? -- Helge Tesdal Plone Solutions ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
Rocky Burt wrote: On Wed, 2006-30-08 at 16:21 +0100, Martin Aspeli wrote: Rocky - ? PLIP 157 - Content rules engine ? PLIP 118 - Porlets engine basd on PlonePortlets and Viewlets These are heavily Zope 3 based, and I know Rocky has an enthusiasm for viewlets :-) This is fine for me. Thanks Martin for taking some initiative for direction on plip reviews... been trying to keep up on this thread on the mailing list but been quite busy. Glad you feel that way, I don't want to be seen to tell people what to do! Personally, though, I prefer to get a bit of a nudge rather than have to do all the leg work myself (and I was in need of a distraction). Martin ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
On Wed, 2006-30-08 at 16:21 +0100, Martin Aspeli wrote: > Rocky > - > ? PLIP 157 - Content rules engine > ? PLIP 118 - Porlets engine basd on PlonePortlets and Viewlets > > These are heavily Zope 3 based, and I know Rocky has an enthusiasm for > viewlets :-) This is fine for me. Thanks Martin for taking some initiative for direction on plip reviews... been trying to keep up on this thread on the mailing list but been quite busy. - Rocky -- Rocky Burt ServerZen Software -- http://www.serverzen.com News About The Server (blog) -- http://www.serverzen.net signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
Martin Aspeli wrote: > ... > PLIP 179 - Improved commenting infrastructure > > There are three plips (120, 124 and 149) which have a CMFPlone but no > bundle so I'm ignoring those. > > > I think the markup (149) support basically works and is fairly low-risk, > but it's also primarily an AT proposal (it's just about making the list > of content types you can select in a TextAreaWidget or RichWidget looked > up in a utility registry). It may be one for Nouri to look after rather > than us. 149 sounds okay to me. A bundle should be made anyway, since it involves changes in Archetypes, ATCT, PortalTransforms, MimetypesRegistry and potentially CMFPlone. Daniel ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: Now what do we do?
Wichert Akkerman wrote: Previously Martin Aspeli wrote: PLIP 173 - OpenID support This one is mine. The current status shows the design nicely but there are a couple of essential bits (like session authentication) still missing (they are listed in the docs in the bundle). I expect it to be fully stable in abou two weeks. A reviewer will need to be be reasonably familiar with PAS plugins to be able to review this I'm afraid. I nominate Helge Tesdal, who, you know, wrote membrane :) Martin ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
