Re: [Zope-dev] Re: zcml entry points
On Friday 19 October 2007 21:17, Martijn Faassen wrote: > Tres Seaver wrote: > > I may not *want* the other package's ZCML to be loaded: some of its > > policies may not be appropriate for my application. +1. Happens to me all the time. > Since this appears to be a rare case that is the exception, what about > using the new ZCML exclude framework for this case? You need to know > what you are doing, but this use case is for people who know exactly > what they're doing anyway, right? -1. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: zcml entry points
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martijn Faassen wrote: > Tres Seaver wrote: >> Wichert Akkerman wrote: > [snip] >>> So I turned things around: if I state in my egg information that I >>> require another package that means I need to have that package >>> available and functional. Which suggests that its zcml has to be loaded >>> before mine. And that is exactly what I am doing: adding an entry point >>> that allows a package to say "in order to function I need to have these >>> zcml files loaded". >> I may not *want* the other package's ZCML to be loaded: some of its >> policies may not be appropriate for my application. > > Since this appears to be a rare case that is the exception, what about > using the new ZCML exclude framework for this case? You need to know > what you are doing, but this use case is for people who know exactly > what they're doing anyway, right? It isn't that rare: how many people want to turn off the Rotterdam skin in Z3, for instance? In general, the authors of a "library" package can't anticipate how their code will be used; the ZCML they provide is intended to cover the cases they know or imagine most people want. ZCML represents policy, not mechanism, and hence is inherently less reusable than code. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software "Excellence by Design"http://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHGV1F+gerLs4ltQ4RAjRaAKCuDy247kYNF5Ol6T6lHl0EQWprCwCgmOoX eKcm7W1oh739digDWK0SG5g= =1y7d -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: zcml entry points
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martijn Faassen wrote: > Hey, > > Martin Aspeli wrote: >> Fred Drake wrote: > [snip] For example, say you want to install oi.plum. You need to add the line 'oi.plum' twice - once under 'eggs' and once under 'zcml' in your buildout.cfg. Forget the latter, and the package doesn't work properly (or at all). >>> I actually really like this; I don't get the configuration for a >>> package unless I ask for it. It's not unusual to want only the code >>> and not the default configuration for a package. >> Right - but you're building an application, and you're pretty >> experienced with Zope. A lot of Plone users just want to install a >> plug-in (a product), basically. Before, they just dropped it into a >> directory. Now, they declare it twice in a file (presuming there's a >> cheese shop release). That's a (small) step backwards (duplication). >> Declaring it once would be a step forwards (no manual download) > > Right - if I understand this well, this would introduce the option not > to have to repeat yourself. You use the egg and that takes care of > loading the ZCML. Sounds like a good thing, as long as it can somehow be > turned off. This would be a good thing for Grok to have. Unless the authors of the eggs you are using have exactly your use cases, automagically enabling all the ZCML in their pacakge is going to cause you grief. In this case, as in classic Zope3, convenience and clean reuse are pulling in separate directions. With all its warts, at least the QuickInstaller tool in Plone allows the site manager to choose which plugins to enable / disable. Now, if the Grok admin UI kept a persistent list of the enbled packages, and exposed a way to inspect both the available and enbaled versions, that would be a reasonable facility. The Zope2 Control_Panel could expose a similar feature for "product"-like packages. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software "Excellence by Design"http://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHGVx6+gerLs4ltQ4RAqbJAKCI2vSgdTJdmr8zl/0jCE+29GI7XACfTJyD s0ihiC+PyRkx0P0emWGd1PU= =71qa -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: zcml entry points
Fred Drake wrote: On 10/17/07, Martin Aspeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Right - but you're building an application, and you're pretty experienced with Zope. A lot of Plone users just want to install a plug-in (a product), basically. Before, they just dropped it into a It sounds like your concerns center around users of a pluggable/extensible application (like Plone), rather than being general Zope concerns. It's certainly reasonable for an application to want a plugin architecture that works that way. I'd say it is a general concern of a framework to try to avoid how often you need to repeat yourself. Right now you to use a Zope 3 package you need to do the following things: * list the egg in your setup.py dependencies * load the ZCML required * import it in your code Investigating ways to reduce this sounds like a win from a framework perspective. Getting rid of the separate ZCML step would help as it'd make it more similar to just reusing an arbitrary Python package, making Zope less special in some ways. > Perhaps the development teams for the applications would be interested > in getting together and sharing a package that supports a plugin > architecture that works that way. That would be a good place to share > effort without negatively impacting users who need bare-metal Zope or > the developers of applications that don't have similar > plugin-management requirements. Sure, we should always avoid negatively impacting people who want to repeat themselves in many places as they need the control in some places. :) That's a given constraint with the bare Zope 3 libraries we'll need to keep in mind always. The ability to not use this should be present, and I'm fine if the default is not to use this. Systems like Plone and Grok can always turn this on. Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: zcml entry points
Tres Seaver wrote: Wichert Akkerman wrote: [snip] So I turned things around: if I state in my egg information that I require another package that means I need to have that package available and functional. Which suggests that its zcml has to be loaded before mine. And that is exactly what I am doing: adding an entry point that allows a package to say "in order to function I need to have these zcml files loaded". I may not *want* the other package's ZCML to be loaded: some of its policies may not be appropriate for my application. Since this appears to be a rare case that is the exception, what about using the new ZCML exclude framework for this case? You need to know what you are doing, but this use case is for people who know exactly what they're doing anyway, right? Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: zcml entry points
Hey, Martin Aspeli wrote: Fred Drake wrote: [snip] For example, say you want to install oi.plum. You need to add the line 'oi.plum' twice - once under 'eggs' and once under 'zcml' in your buildout.cfg. Forget the latter, and the package doesn't work properly (or at all). I actually really like this; I don't get the configuration for a package unless I ask for it. It's not unusual to want only the code and not the default configuration for a package. Right - but you're building an application, and you're pretty experienced with Zope. A lot of Plone users just want to install a plug-in (a product), basically. Before, they just dropped it into a directory. Now, they declare it twice in a file (presuming there's a cheese shop release). That's a (small) step backwards (duplication). Declaring it once would be a step forwards (no manual download) Right - if I understand this well, this would introduce the option not to have to repeat yourself. You use the egg and that takes care of loading the ZCML. Sounds like a good thing, as long as it can somehow be turned off. This would be a good thing for Grok to have. Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] PILwoTk egg to PyPI?
In the meantime, that URL is meant to be there "forever", so those who want it should feel free to use it. - C On Oct 19, 2007, at 6:52 PM, Jim Fulton wrote: On Oct 19, 2007, at 6:44 PM, Chris McDonough wrote: If you mean sane in the sense of setuptools-compatible, I've actually repackaged PIL to use setuptools here: http://dist.repoze.org/PIL-1.1.6.tar.gz OK, so now we *both* have. :) It would be better, IMO, if we could get Fredrik to make the release setuptools compatible in the first place. Jim -- Jim Fulton Zope Corporation ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] PILwoTk egg to PyPI?
On Oct 19, 2007, at 6:44 PM, Chris McDonough wrote: If you mean sane in the sense of setuptools-compatible, I've actually repackaged PIL to use setuptools here: http://dist.repoze.org/PIL-1.1.6.tar.gz OK, so now we *both* have. :) It would be better, IMO, if we could get Fredrik to make the release setuptools compatible in the first place. Jim -- Jim Fulton Zope Corporation ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] PILwoTk egg to PyPI?
If you mean sane in the sense of setuptools-compatible, I've actually repackaged PIL to use setuptools here: http://dist.repoze.org/PIL-1.1.6.tar.gz On Oct 19, 2007, at 5:17 PM, Jim Fulton wrote: On Oct 19, 2007, at 5:07 PM, Jeff Kowalczyk wrote: Would someone be willing to add the PILwoTk-1.1.6.3(-py2.4-linux- i686).egg to PyPI? Binaries, except for Windows, should never never be uploaded to PyPI (or download.zope.org). There are just too many variables to building binaries. A more interesting questions is whether the source release should be uploaded. I wish someone could convince Fredrik Lundh to make a saner release of PIL. Maybe someone could pursue this on the image- sig mailing list (http://mail.python.org/pipermail/image-sig/). Jim -- Jim Fulton Zope Corporation ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists -http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: PILwoTk egg to PyPI?
Jim Fulton wrote: > Binaries, except for Windows, should never never be uploaded to PyPI (or > download.zope.org). There are just too many variables to building > binaries. Yes, that's what I meant to ask for, PILwoTk-1.1.6.3 to PyPI as a source release. I'm currently using http://download.zope.org/distribution/PILwoTk-1.1.6.3.tar.gz > A more interesting questions is whether the source release should be > uploaded. I wish someone could convince Fredrik Lundh to make a saner > release of PIL. Maybe someone could pursue this on the image- sig > mailing list (http://mail.python.org/pipermail/image-sig/). Yes, that's what I was hoping to avoid asking ;) since I don't know the PIL packaging rationale. The effbot.org release pages are so thorough, I presumed that PIL was going to continue to be packaged as-is. Thanks. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] PILwoTk egg to PyPI?
On Oct 19, 2007, at 5:07 PM, Jeff Kowalczyk wrote: Would someone be willing to add the PILwoTk-1.1.6.3(-py2.4-linux- i686).egg to PyPI? Binaries, except for Windows, should never never be uploaded to PyPI (or download.zope.org). There are just too many variables to building binaries. A more interesting questions is whether the source release should be uploaded. I wish someone could convince Fredrik Lundh to make a saner release of PIL. Maybe someone could pursue this on the image- sig mailing list (http://mail.python.org/pipermail/image-sig/). Jim -- Jim Fulton Zope Corporation ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] PILwoTk egg to PyPI?
Would someone be willing to add the PILwoTk-1.1.6.3(-py2.4-linux-i686).egg to PyPI? If PILwoTk becomes a PyPI entry, I'd like to ask a follow-up on the Plone list to see if ploneout buildouts can/should by default depend on PILwoTk to satisfy Plone-3.0's PIL dependency. I'm able to use PILwoTk for this purpose while still running from a python with no installed pacakges, making ploneout very easy to use. Thanks. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Zope Tests: 5 OK
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Thu Oct 18 12:00:00 2007 UTC to Fri Oct 19 12:00:00 2007 UTC. There were 5 messages: 5 from Zope Unit Tests. Tests passed OK --- Subject: OK : Zope-2.7 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Oct 18 20:52:00 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2007-October/008511.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Oct 18 20:53:32 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2007-October/008512.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Oct 18 20:55:02 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2007-October/008513.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Oct 18 20:56:32 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2007-October/008514.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Oct 18 20:58:02 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2007-October/008515.html ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
