On Apr 8, 2005 12:15 AM, Andreas Pakulat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmm, could you (just for my own interest) point out the difference
between PropertySheets and ProperyManager (which I used to define
properies for my own product-classes)? IIRC PropertySheets allow to
have multiple groups of
Jim Fulton wrote:
Jake wrote:
My question, since it now seems like I am not the only one using ZClasses
I doubt that that is the case.
Sorry, I missread your note. I meant to say that I was
sure you are *not* the only one using ZClasses.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wednesday 06 April 2005 16:52, Dieter Maurer wrote:
For new projects, you should investigate the new options.
Product development will get much simpler with Zope3 technology
(and its schemas and views). Currently, there is no TTW
(Through The Web) development in Zope3 land, but that is
Re: [Zope] Does anyone care whether we deprecate ZClasses? To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: zope@zope.org Message-ID:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii Jonathan Cyr wrote at 2005-4-6 16:06 -0400:
... just show me how under-represented that beginner and intermediate
Zope
Thank You for giving me a
timeframe for this stuff. 4 to 6 years is indeed a long time. That
would, in effect triple the lifespan of my project, and be far more
reasonable.
It was the "yeah, dump it today" remarks that set me off. These
remarks are shortsighted at best, and harmful to Zope's
Yuri wrote at 2005-4-7 14:30 +0200:
...
Isn't Archetypes only for Plone?
No, it can be used with pure CMF...
... if one is ready to fix a few Plone dependencies that creep
in in most Archetype releases.
...
Just release a way to convert a Zclass to a Python Product (at least
for the
On 07.Apr 2005 - 20:13:58, Dieter Maurer wrote:
Yuri wrote at 2005-4-7 14:30 +0200:
...
Isn't Archetypes only for Plone?
No, it can be used with pure CMF...
... if one is ready to fix a few Plone dependencies that creep
in in most Archetype releases.
...
Just release a way to
- Original Message -
From: Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(...)
I submitted a patch to the Zope collector but I had removed
one bit of black magic too much -- and other products broke that
were dependent on this magic.
My patch which were already integrated into the Zope
(Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 06:46:23PM -0400) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote/schrieb/egrapse:
From: Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
ZClasses feature prominently in the Zope book.
Seems they are more recommended than the new development paradigm (which
does not yet feature at all in the Zope book).
I
On Apr 6, 2005, at 6:59, Andreas Jung wrote:
--On Dienstag, 5. April 2005 16:38 Uhr -0400 Jake [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
And that is probably the best arguement for keeping them around
longer.
We should get to the point: if some people depend on ZClasses then
they should
take over some
PROTECTED] la part de
Sascha Welter
Envoyé : mercredi 6 avril 2005 09:44
À : zope@zope.org
Objet : Re: [Zope] Does anyone care whether we deprecate ZClasses?
(Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 06:46:23PM -0400) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote/schrieb/egrapse:
From: Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
ZClasses feature
I don't know if I'm living under a rock or something, but I'm using Zope
on and off since about 2.5.1, and I've barely heard about archetypes.
So far I did not come across a simple introduction, tutorial,
or even explanation of them.
The new stuff mentioned on this thread is the zope 3
, 2005 11:59 PM
Subject: Re: [Zope] Does anyone care whether we deprecate ZClasses?
___
Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman
--On Mittwoch, 6. April 2005 12:59 Uhr -0500 Ausum Studio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this a kafkanian situation? Are really core developers asking the
community to kick a used Zope's feature, saying it's because it's hard to
maintain it, and simultaneously to say it's code 'unmaintained and
Yoohoo,
ZClasses are not an expert technology to use, they are an introduction
to Zope... Just because I use a thing, doesn't mean I can
support/maintain a thing. I can read the list, and try to help folks
with questions that I've experienced... that's the support that can be
offered at my
--On Mittwoch, 6. April 2005 16:06 Uhr -0400 Jonathan Cyr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Yoohoo,
ZClasses are not an expert technology to use, they are an introduction to
Zope... Just because I use a thing, doesn't mean I can support/maintain a
thing. I can read the list, and try to help folks with
Jonathan Cyr wrote at 2005-4-6 16:06 -0400:
... just show me how under-represented that beginner and intermediate
Zope developers use this list... and then I think, perhaps there aren't
any, just me and a few others... and if that's the case, Zope's screwed,
and the horse I rode in on.
Do not
SOS
This would mean a disaster for us. We've created a lot products using
ZClasses in
production environment (internet,intranet,eai and so on) since zope-2.1.4.
In short our complete developement in Zope is heavily based on ZClasses.
We plan to use ZClasses in the future, too. For us ZClasses
Arenz, Ralph escribió:
SOS
This would mean a disaster for us. We've created a lot products using
ZClasses in
production environment (internet,intranet,eai and so on) since zope-2.1.4.
In short our complete developement in Zope is heavily based on ZClasses.
We plan to use ZClasses in the future,
On the Paris sprint, one thing that was noted was how ironic it was
that the release of 2.8, which includes support for the new
recommended development paradigm, was held up becuase we neeeded to
support an old non-recommended one. :-)
Anyway, my main question is: You who are using ZClasses,
Lennart Regebro said:
Anyway, my main question is: You who are using ZClasses, can't you
just stay on Zope2.8 or 2.9, if Zope 2.10 would not contain ZClass
support?
That is possible, but it would be nice to be able to transition out of
ZClasses through 2.8 - 2.9 - 2.10 as opposed to there
Lennart Regebro wrote at 2005-4-5 11:48 +0200:
On the Paris sprint, one thing that was noted was how ironic it was
that the release of 2.8, which includes support for the new
recommended development paradigm, was held up becuase we neeeded to
support an old non-recommended one. :-)
ZClasses
And that is probably the best arguement for keeping them around longer.
Until the documentation has caught up to the new features, it seems a bit
ahead of schedule to start dropping support for them.
Jake
--
http://www.ZopeZone.com
Dieter Maurer said:
Lennart Regebro wrote at 2005-4-5 11:48
--On Dienstag, 5. April 2005 16:38 Uhr -0400 Jake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And that is probably the best arguement for keeping them around longer.
We should get to the point: if some people depend on ZClasses then they
should
take over some responsibility in maintaining them in future releases.
Yes, but BEFORE do a tool to convert them in a python product or
archetype similar, a tool to change base classes, a tool to convert a
zclass based on catagaware to one based on catalogPATHaware, or merge
the two.
Or you just deprecate something that is used and don't deprecate some
code that
Andreas Jung ha scritto:
--On Montag, 4. April 2005 9:58 Uhr +0200 Yuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, but BEFORE do a tool to convert them in a python product or
archetype similar, a tool to change base classes, a tool to convert a
zclass based on catagaware to one based on catalogPATHaware, or
--On Montag, 4. April 2005 10:23 Uhr +0200 Yuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andreas Jung ha scritto:
--On Montag, 4. April 2005 9:58 Uhr +0200 Yuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, but BEFORE do a tool to convert them in a python product or
archetype similar, a tool to change base classes, a tool to
Chris Withers escribió:
Well, you know what I'm gonna say...
+1 for their demise.
+1 for DTML going too, oops, wait, Andreas said not to bring that up ;-)
cheers,
Chris
Jim Fulton wrote:
ZClasses are a feature that support through-the-web development.
Many people have found them useful in the
I agree that ZClasses are not good to use. However, I have a product
based on ZClasses that I wrote several years ago (after reading the
printed Zope book - doh!), and it's working well for several of my
clients. If future versions of Zope were to not support it, that would
be a huge problem
AM Thomas escribió:
I agree that ZClasses are not good to use. However, I have a product
based on ZClasses that I wrote several years ago (after reading the
printed Zope book - doh!), and it's working well for several of my
clients. If future versions of Zope were to not support it, that
On Apr 4, 2005 5:14 PM, Garito [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps will be a good choice to make ZClasses as an installable product
(I don't know if this is possible or not
Sure it is, but the problem is that supporting it in future versions
of Zope very well may need changes in Zope itself.
Jim Fulton escribió:
ZClasses are a feature that support through-the-web development.
Many people have found them useful in the past, but they have some
significant deficiencies, including:
- They can't be managed with file-system tools, especially
revision control systems like CVS and
On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Garito wrote:
My +1 for ZClasses deprecation
And +1 for DTML deprecation
Try to keep Zope simple
-1 for DTML deprecation.
It serves a different purpose that ZPT--
DTML is Logic+HTML
ZPT is HTML+Logic.
--On Sonntag, 3. April 2005 14:57 Uhr +0200 Garito [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
And +1 for DTML deprecation
Deprecating DTML was never an issue. So stop the discussion about DTML.
We're talking
about ZClasses.
-aj
pgp0r7S8eJ6rx.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Andreas Jung wrote at 2005-4-2 08:58 +0200:
--On Freitag, 1. April 2005 16:52 Uhr -0500 Jake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
want to use them going forward, but what are the reasons why not to
support them as legacy into 3/2.10?
To avoid that people use ZClasses in the future :-)
ZClasses have a set
Jake wrote:
My question, since it now seems like I am not the only one using ZClasses
I doubt that that is the case.
is, why not support them? You listed out the reasons why someone wouldn't
want to use them going forward, but what are the reasons why not to
support them as legacy into 3/2.10?
Are
We could choose to deprecate ZClasses. If we deprecated them in
Zope 2.8, they would still work in Zope 2.8 and Zope 2.9, but
their support would be removed in Zope 2.10. Would anyone be upset
if this happened?
Another vote for depreciation. I've looked at ZClasses, got confused,
and built
ZClasses are a feature that support through-the-web development.
Many people have found them useful in the past, but they have some
significant deficiencies, including:
- They can't be managed with file-system tools, especially
revision control systems like CVS and subversion.
- They don't work
+1 for deprecation.
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Jim Fulton wrote:
ZClasses are a feature that support through-the-web development.
Many people have found them useful in the past, but they have some
significant deficiencies, including:
- They can't be managed with file-system tools, especially
And another +1
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dennis Allison
Sent: 01 April 2005 15:44
To: Jim Fulton
Cc: zope@zope.org
Subject: Re: [Zope] Does anyone care whether we deprecate ZClasses?
+1 for deprecation.
On Fri, 1
Jim Fulton wrote:
(snip)
Does anyone care whether we deprecate ZClasses?
ZClasses ? What are ZClasses ?
(Sorry, couldn't resist. +1 for deprecation)
--
Bruno Desthuilliers
Développeur
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org
-l for deprecation
...until we build a replacement anyway...
Dennis Allison wrote:
+1 for deprecation.
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Jim Fulton wrote:
ZClasses are a feature that support through-the-web development.
Many people have found them useful in the past, but they have some
significant
I vote we take off and nuke them from orbit it is the only way to be sure.
(+1 get rid of those dang things)
I have tried to help far too many people over the years on #zope that had
problems with zclasses. They just seem fragile and should be removed.
On Friday 01 April 2005 5:22 am, Jim
Allen Schmidt wrote:
-l for deprecation
...until we build a replacement anyway...
What do you mean by replacement? In Zope 3, I plan to
provide persistent modules to support prototying new
applications through the web. It will be possible to
automatically convert these to file-system-based
As someone who has at least 5 different products using ZClasses across 10
different websites with millions of hits a month, I am certainly not happy
to see them go, but I do understand that their time has come.
If they are supported in 2.8 - 2.9 and gone in 3.0 I guess that is ok.
Again, it is
Jake wrote:
As someone who has at least 5 different products using ZClasses across 10
different websites with millions of hits a month, I am certainly not happy
to see them go, but I do understand that their time has come.
If they are supported in 2.8 - 2.9 and gone in 3.0 I guess that is ok.
If
+1 for deprecation. However, I haven't used them for years.
I suspect you will hear otherwise from some people with
currently deployed solutions based on ZClasses...
(cue Dieter)
--
Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
___
Zope maillist -
--On Freitag, 1. April 2005 7:22 Uhr -0500 Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We could choose to deprecate ZClasses. If we deprecated them in
Zope 2.8, they would still work in Zope 2.8 and Zope 2.9, but
their support would be removed in Zope 2.10. Would anyone be upset
if this happened?
+2 to
My vote is to keep them around for 2.8 and 2.9 but say goodbye after that.
Again.. it won't be easy for us, but who said progress ever was.
Jake
--
http://www.ZopeZone.com
Jim Fulton said:
Jake wrote:
As someone who has at least 5 different products using ZClasses across
10
different
+1 on deprecation.
(As for replacements, persistent schemas in Zope3 will enable the
thing that ZClasses should have been: Combining a set of base classes
with functionality with a TTW editable schema.
CPSschemas is halfway there: You can make your own content classes
already, but you can't
Jim Fulton wrote at 2005-4-1 07:22 -0500:
...
We could choose to deprecate ZClasses. If we deprecated them in
Zope 2.8, they would still work in Zope 2.8 and Zope 2.9, but
their support would be removed in Zope 2.10. Would anyone be upset
if this happened?
We use ZClasses for several
@zope.org
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: [Zope] Does anyone care whether we deprecate ZClasses?
My vote is to keep them around for 2.8 and 2.9 but say goodbye after that.
Again.. it won't be easy for us, but who said progress ever was.
Jake
--
http://www.ZopeZone.com
Jim
Big mistake, IMHO,
You have no replacement for intermediate developers... the only decent
documentation, being the various books, have ZClasses throughout.
Explain their absence to the newbies grokking for Zope enlightenment.
Not everyone needs/wants development tools, some like the TTW
My question, since it now seems like I am not the only one using ZClasses
is, why not support them? You listed out the reasons why someone wouldn't
want to use them going forward, but what are the reasons why not to
support them as legacy into 3/2.10?
Jake
--
http://www.ZopeZone.com
Dieter
--On Freitag, 1. April 2005 16:21 Uhr -0500 Ausum Studio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whether there already is a tool like that in ZopeLand, I would agree to
its deprecation, but actually there's nothing like it. Certainly ZClasses
is not what it promised to be, but what it does do, it does it
--On Freitag, 1. April 2005 16:52 Uhr -0500 Jake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
want to use them going forward, but what are the reasons why not to
support them as legacy into 3/2.10?
To avoid that people use ZClasses in the future :-)
-aj
pgpNlVUdoEQdZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--On Freitag, 1. April 2005 23:10 Uhr -0800 David H
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would recommend ZClass people should form a group. And have good
people keep the thing compatible with each Zope release.
David
I doubt that anyone will touch ZClasses - except Dieter and Jim :-)
It's good to see
57 matches
Mail list logo
