On Tuesday, April 05, 2011, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:57, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 07:56, Chris McDonough wrote:
> >> Did this particular effort get to the place where there are students and
> >> mentors lined up to do ZTK porting?
> >
> > No, it
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:57, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 07:56, Chris McDonough wrote:
>> Did this particular effort get to the place where there are students and
>> mentors lined up to do ZTK porting?
>
> No, it got to the pace where I'm supposed to set up a team page on a W
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 07:56, Chris McDonough wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-03-17 at 14:57 -0400, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> I'm still in Atlanta, and Arc Riley asked for a Zope person to
>> possibly mentor some zope.* project for Python Software Foundation
>> this year. They probably want to get more of t
On Thu, 2011-03-17 at 14:57 -0400, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> I'm still in Atlanta, and Arc Riley asked for a Zope person to
> possibly mentor some zope.* project for Python Software Foundation
> this year. They probably want to get more of the Zope Toolkit ported
> to Python 3. I forwarded the roadm
Am 20.03.2011, 18:07 Uhr, schrieb Tres Seaver :
> The one downside I can see is giving up on the sugar^Wexpressivity of
> calling the interface directly -- I guess we could propagate the
> 'default_factory' argument through to the '__call__' of interface. Note
> that I *wanted* some extra sugar a
Hi there,
On 03/20/2011 05:47 PM, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Maybe there's something in Grok that comes close to this. I've just
> not been able to distinguish the "Grok the web framework" code with
> its convention over configuration idea from some basic explicit
> configuration approach.
I don
Hi there,
On 03/20/2011 04:00 PM, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Taking one of the examples of grokcore.component, I think there's a
> lot that can be made simpler:
>
> import grokcore.component
> from zope.i18n.interfaces import ITranslationDomain
>
> class HelloWorldTranslationDomain(grokcore.compo
On 03/20/2011 04:29 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
[snip]
>> I think you cannot avoid this, if you want to support an explicit
>> configuration phase. Otherwise the first import of a module could
>> occur at any point at runtime and have a config
On 03/21/2011 10:17 AM, Jan-Wijbrand Kolman wrote:
>> - scanning can take a long time, making application (re)start slow for
>> non-trivial projects
>
> At what point is an application not trivial anymore? In applications I
> build so far, startup time has not been an issue at all. But maybe
Hi,
On 03/20/2011 03:28 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Hm, it's been a while since I've looked at grok. Some notes:
We have more than four years of experience with this topic...
> - The mechanism I'm thinking of should not require *any* ZCML.
Check. we just bootstrap the grokking process from ZCML ri
On 03/20/2011 02:31 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> Getting ZCA/ZTK to run on PyPy is probably easier, and actually more
>> useful. Maybe someone would want to mentor that?
>
> This is another porting project. If I was a student, I wouldn't find
On 03/19/2011 10:02 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> Getting ZCA/ZTK to run on PyPy is probably easier, and actually more
> useful. Maybe someone would want to mentor that?
I agree it'd be easier and more useful. There's also interesting
potential in exploiting PyPy's magic in things like security an
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 13:28, Stephan Richter
wrote:
> On Monday, March 21, 2011, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> > So I'll sign up as a Zope team member.
>>
>> Cool. But it turns out we need three to make a team (see
>> https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dHh3WFNGYzkyWWE0ZjM1eFFoUU
>> VGW
On Monday, March 21, 2011, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> > So I'll sign up as a Zope team member.
>
> Cool. But it turns out we need three to make a team (see
> https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dHh3WFNGYzkyWWE0ZjM1eFFoUU
> VGWmc6MQ), and we only really have one. :-) I guess I could take
On 3/21/11 10:30 AM, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>>> - you may have some draft files in your tree that are not ready
for use
>>> and never referenced anywhere, but a scan will still process them.
>>
>> This is true.
>
> I ran into this with .html.py files generated by Chameleon as well. My
> Z
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 01:06, Stephan Richter
wrote:
> On Saturday, March 19, 2011, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> Getting ZCA/ZTK to run on PyPy is probably easier, and actually more
>> useful. Maybe someone would want to mentor that?
>
> While I would mentor someone wanting to do such a project, I w
On 3/21/11 10:17 , Jan-Wijbrand Kolman wrote:
> On 3/20/11 16:12 PM, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>>> Pyramid only does so if you tell it to do so by using config.scan(). You
>>> are not obliged to do that, and I have several pyramid projects which do
>>> not do any scanning. Not doing scanning has the
On 3/20/11 16:12 PM, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>>> Both Grok and Pyramid (or martian and venusian really) do a scan of
>>> the code to find the registration hints.
>>
>> Pyramid only does so if you tell it to do so by using config.scan(). You
>> are not obliged to do that, and I have several pyramid
Hi,
Not sure where to 'hook into' the discussion thread, so I'll just start
here:
On 3/20/11 15:28 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Hm, it's been a while since I've looked at grok. Some notes:
>
> - The mechanism I'm thinking of should not require *any* ZCML.
Do you mean "without having a configure.zcml
On 2011-3-20 17:47, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Sure. I didn't mean to exclude this. Pyramid allows you to do a very
> explicit configuration without any scanning. If you write an
> application and have full control over all its parts, this works.
>
> Things get complicated, once you reuse libraries
> - The mechanism shouldn't require something to "grok"/analyze the
> code. The mechanism should be explicit. This is implied by
> "pythonic". I remember Grok being more implicit than skimming the
> links above suggest. Perhaps Grok has has become more explicit than
> I remember.
+10^som
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/20/2011 09:46 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Problem
> ===
>
> ZTK projects use ZCML too much. Ideally, ZCML should only
> have to be used when we want to override something.
>
> Solution sketch
> ===
>
> I think we ought to come up
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> I disagree. First, the notion that you'd import at run time is pretty odd,
> unless you count start-up in "runtime".
Right, sorry. I'm used to writing add-ons for an application. In this
environment my code isn't in charge of the startup proce
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> I appreciate that in Python 3 the in-class advice (which was pioneered
> by zope.component/zope.interface, don't forget) may not work properly,
> so we may not have any choice eventually.
There's really no choice. The syntax we use today sim
Hi,
On 20 March 2011 15:29, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> I think you cannot avoid this, if you want to support an explicit
>> configuration phase. Otherwise the first import of a module could
>> occur at any point at runtime and have a configuration side-effect
>> like registering a new view. Personally
Hi,
On 20 March 2011 15:00, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> - The mechanism shouldn't require something to "grok"/analyze the
>> code. The mechanism should be explicit. This is implied by
>> "pythonic". I remember Grok being more implicit than
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> - The mechanism shouldn't require something to "grok"/analyze the
>> code. The mechanism should be explicit. This is implied by
>> "pythonic". I remember Grok being more implicit
On 3/20/11 16:03 , Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> On 3/20/11 16:00 , Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>>> - The mechanism shouldn't require something to "grok"/analyze the
>>>code. The mechanism should be explicit. This is implied by
>>>"pythonic"
On 3/20/11 16:00 , Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> - The mechanism shouldn't require something to "grok"/analyze the
>> code. The mechanism should be explicit. This is implied by
>> "pythonic". I remember Grok being more implicit than skimming
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> - The mechanism shouldn't require something to "grok"/analyze the
> code. The mechanism should be explicit. This is implied by
> "pythonic". I remember Grok being more implicit than skimming the
> links above suggest. Perhaps Grok has has b
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> On 20 March 2011 13:46, Jim Fulton wrote:
>
>> I think we ought to come up with a much cleaner way of defining
>> default configuration. (Pyramid does this by passing default values in
>> adapter calls, but I think we can do a lot better tha
On 20 March 2011 13:46, Jim Fulton wrote:
> I think we ought to come up with a much cleaner way of defining
> default configuration. (Pyramid does this by passing default values in
> adapter calls, but I think we can do a lot better than that.) I'd
> like to see us come up with a "pythonic" way
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> I'm still in Atlanta, and Arc Riley asked for a Zope person to
> possibly mentor some zope.* project for Python Software Foundation
> this year.
Here's another idea.
Problem
===
ZTK projects use ZCML too much. Ideally, ZCML should o
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> Getting ZCA/ZTK to run on PyPy is probably easier, and actually more
> useful. Maybe someone would want to mentor that?
This is another porting project. If I was a student, I wouldn't find it very
interesting to port some code I hadn't wr
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Stephan Richter
wrote:
...
> I would be much
> more interested in seeing a working WebOb to zope.publisher bridge. I know
> Jim(?)
Yes.
> has done some initial work on that. I think it would make an
> interesting PSF project, since it encourages more reusability
On Saturday, March 19, 2011, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> Getting ZCA/ZTK to run on PyPy is probably easier, and actually more
> useful. Maybe someone would want to mentor that?
While I would mentor someone wanting to do such a project, I would be much
more interested in seeing a working WebOb to zop
Getting ZCA/ZTK to run on PyPy is probably easier, and actually more
useful. Maybe someone would want to mentor that?
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 22:08, Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> I'm still in Atlanta, and Arc Riley asked for a Zope person to
>> po
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 13:07, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 22:08, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>>> I'm still in Atlanta, and Arc Riley asked for a Zope person to
>>> possibly mentor some zope.* project for Python Software Found
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 22:08, Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> I'm still in Atlanta, and Arc Riley asked for a Zope person to
>> possibly mentor some zope.* project for Python Software Foundation
>> this year. They probably want to get more of the Zo
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> I'm still in Atlanta, and Arc Riley asked for a Zope person to
> possibly mentor some zope.* project for Python Software Foundation
> this year. They probably want to get more of the Zope Toolkit ported
> to Python 3. I forwarded the roadma
I'm still in Atlanta, and Arc Riley asked for a Zope person to
possibly mentor some zope.* project for Python Software Foundation
this year. They probably want to get more of the Zope Toolkit ported
to Python 3. I forwarded the roadmap to him, so anyone who wants to
mentor, that would be great.
I'
41 matches
Mail list logo
