The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7897
Blamelist:
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope trunk 2.4 Windows 2000
zc-bbwin6.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7897
Blamelist:
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope branches 2.10 2.4 Linux
zc-buildbot.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7900
Blamelist:
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope branches 2.10 2.4 Windows 2000
zc-bbwin2.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7900
Blamelist:
Jonathan wrote:
BTW - nothing beats ZClasses and DTML for quick-and-dirty demos,
one-time applications, and rapid-prototyping!
I prefer to use page templates, python scripts and PropertyManagers for
this ;-)
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting
-
Christopher Lozinski wrote:
At the risk of going down in history (and Google Searches) as the man
who supports ZClasses, I think that someone deserves to come to their
defense.
I think that there is a different tool for every job. Sometimes I think
Plone is the best solution, sometimes Zope
My 0.02 EUR:
I like the idea and aim of ZClasses. However:
I think the implementation makes them more difficult to create than
disk-based classes, which defeats the purpose. I also think that
without exact knowledge of the limitations of ZClasses they have a
high risk of programming yourself
On 9/27/06, Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's definitely time to work on a replacement.
Yes. And here is my short vision of that. Comments are appreciated.
1. We have a base content class used to create content objects. This
has the concept of type, pretty much like CMFs portal_type.
Christopher Lozinski wrote:
I think that there is a different tool for every job. Sometimes I think
Plone is the best solution, sometimes Zope 2 is the best solution.
Sometimes Zope 3is the best solution, and sometimes ZClasses are the
best solution.
Yes, you're right about different
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 9/27/06, Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's definitely time to work on a replacement.
Yes. And here is my short vision of that. Comments are appreciated.
Have you looked at zope.app.schemacontent, Sidnei's prototype for
TTW-schemas and content based on
On Thu, 2006-28-09 at 14:13 +0200, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
The problem is the lack of an exit strategy. If you only need a simpel
web app, fine. If you're creating a prototype, ZClasses are hard to get
out of without rewriting a whole lot of code.
In the words of The Pragmatic
On 9/28/06, Lennart Regebro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My 0.02 EUR:
I like the idea and aim of ZClasses. However:
I think the implementation makes them more difficult to create than
disk-based classes, which defeats the purpose. I also think that
without exact knowledge of the limitations of
Philipp von weitershausen wrote:
For these use cases it is not necessary to use a complex machinery
like ZClasses. The objects we're talking about here could be very very
dull, to the point where we don't need something like a dynamically
constructed class.
I appreciate all your comments.
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Christopher Lozinski wrote:
I think that there is a different tool for every job. Sometimes I
think Plone is the best solution, sometimes Zope 2 is the best
solution. Sometimes Zope 3is the best solution, and sometimes
ZClasses are the best solution.
I
Jim Fulton asked
Chris, have you tried ArchGenXML?
I did do a project in Archetypes, in Plone. If I recall correctly,
Archetypes requires CMF. And that is way too much code to add to my
application. My workflow requirements are trivial. I think that
Archetypes is quite brilliant at
Paul Winkler wrote:
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 06:26:49PM -0500, whit wrote:
It seems like if you've set your PYTHONPATH and start zope, you would
expect that path to be available.
Indeed.
Anyone object to this going forward? Anyone think this is a bug that
should be fixed(on older versions)?
if zclasses(and some of the niceties that depended on them like
ZPatterns) could reliably roundtrip to the filesystem, would we be
having this conversation?
I don't know...it seems like if you tackled the less sexy problem of
making zclasses play with normal developer tool chain, the divide
Thanks for the comments. For all the things you wrote that I deleted,
I would just say Exactly! :-) Here are the things that are not
exactly!:
On 9/28/06, Philipp von Weitershausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you looked at zope.app.schemacontent, Sidnei's prototype for
TTW-schemas and content
ZClasses don't get better from writing long postings.
Ah, yes but I can write much faster than I can code. What am I doing
on this list!?! All I have to do is to motivate someone else to do the
work!
programmers are generally motivated by concrete contributions ie money,
code, beer, or
Martijn Faasen makes the point that it is important for the Zope 3
developers to have good use cases.
So here we go. Here is my distributed Object use case for Zope 3
developers. Can I do this in Zope 3?
I run a job board for each technology. I have one job board for
zope/plone
I've been doing a lot of work with Paste in the past year, cutting down on my
deployments of Zope.
Now I'm taking a new look at Zope 3 and Zope 2, and wondering if it's possible
to
use paste pipeline/filter in either version of Zope. I've looked at
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 01:11:05PM -0400, Brad Clements wrote:
| I've been doing a lot of work with Paste in the past year, cutting down on my
| deployments of Zope.
|
| Now I'm taking a new look at Zope 3 and Zope 2, and wondering if it's
possible to
| use paste pipeline/filter in either
Jonathan wrote at 2006-9-27 12:42 -0400:
I found a thread (from March 2006) discussing the future of zclasses, but i
could not determine if a 'final' decision had been made.
According to Changes.txt for Zope 2.10.0:
ZClasses are deprecated and should no longer be used. In addition any code
- Original Message -
From: Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jonathan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: zope-dev@zope.org
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] Future of ZClasses
Jonathan wrote at 2006-9-27 12:42 -0400:
I found a thread (from March 2006)
Jonathan wrote at 2006-9-28 15:11 -0400:
...
For internal applications I would rather leave the ZClasses in place and try
to fix whatever breaks when zope is upgraded, however the application that
caused my initial question is for an external client (with no in-house zope
expertise of their
- Original Message -
From: Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jonathan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: zope-dev@zope.org
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 4:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] Future of ZClasses
Jonathan wrote at 2006-9-28 15:11 -0400:
...
For internal applications I would
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 01:11:05PM -0400, Brad Clements wrote:
| I've been doing a lot of work with Paste in the past year, cutting down on my
| deployments of Zope.
|
| Now I'm taking a new look at Zope 3 and Zope 2, and wondering if it's possible to
| use paste
Dieter Maurer wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2006-9-28 14:23 +0200:
...
Why not set marker interfaces directly on the objects? That whole type
thing is unnecessary. Just use interfaces.
Usually, a type is seen as a set of objects, its type instances.
It is quite nice to be able
Dieter Maurer wrote:
Also the thread that ZClass (re)distribution code will be removed
need not worry you too much. Fortunately, Zope is open source
and you can simply combine the new release with pieces of an older
release to retain features essential to you.
I see no problem in making the
29 matches
Mail list logo
