Martijn Faassen wrote at 2007-10-24 18:38 +0200:
...
I
disagree with the position that should not ever treat an adapter
registration as an implementation detail to provide some default
behavior. Sometimes the behavior of a library *relies* on certain
adapters being registered. An example is an
On 10/25/07, Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can definitely see a use in the zope3 and grok world for some more
ZODB persistent configuration. Maybe much of what is today actually
done in ZCML shuld rather be done there?
Does it need to be persistent or just placeful?
I'd want
Hello,
On 10/24/07, Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
I think maybe more abstractly, it might be useful to think about
separating based on libraries vs. applications. Libraries should be
as policy-free as possible (otherwise they're not libraries, they're
applications).
On 10/24/07, Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe we need to add a term, 'plugin', to describe things like Zope2
products which register only behavior and not addable applications.
The line gets fuzzy here, too: PAS uses 'plugin' to describe an object
which is added to a persistent
On Oct 24, 2007, at 12:54 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 10/24/07, Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe we need to add a term, 'plugin', to describe things like Zope2
products which register only behavior and not addable
applications.
The line gets fuzzy here, too: PAS uses 'plugin'
On Oct 22, 2007, at 11:46 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 10/22/07, Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In at least 3 places we express dependency information. For different
*purposes* in each case, but we still state something like:
1. we use dependency X, and please download and install
