Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-22 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, It is my understanding that the ZTK is primarily to adopt proven solutions that arise from our community that we intend to be shared by this community. I'll also note that Martian is already in use in combination with Bluebream, Zope 2 and Grok. With that, I was thinking, concerning

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Lennart Regebro
Also, the decorators will always return the original component, meaning they can easily be used as post-config: @adapter(IMyFace, IMyFeet) class FootInMouth(object): ... Will mark the class as an adapter, but not register it. @adapt(IMyFace, IMyFeet) class FootInMouth(object): ... Will

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Jim Fulton
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote: ... 4. zope.interface already does, and zope.component will as well, once it's ported. That means we get things like: class IMyFace(Interface):    whatevah class IMyFeet(Interface):    something

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, For Martian, Python 3 support is mostly an issue of making class directives work as class decorators. I'm not sure what Lennart means by point 1. Anyway, Grok's configuration is dependent on the rules you give it, so it's possible to have a completely explicit set of directives with

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 14:17, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Anyway, Grok's configuration is dependent on the rules you give it, so it's possible to have a completely explicit set of directives with no implicit fallback to default values whatsoever. Martian supports that

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Jim Fulton
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 14:17, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: ... With martian, the registration is then done by the grokking process, but I think decorators would be a process that is more acceptable to

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Martijn Faassen
On 03/21/2011 03:07 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote: On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 14:17, Martijn Faassenfaas...@startifact.com wrote: Anyway, Grok's configuration is dependent on the rules you give it, so it's possible to have a completely explicit set of directives with no implicit fallback to default

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Martijn Faassen
On 03/21/2011 03:28 PM, Jim Fulton wrote: I don't know what the right answer is ... at least not yet. :) In Django and sqlalchemy declarative a meta class is used for this kind of configuration. Since that is subclassing, it implies inheritance, I think. Of course metaclasses are not very

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 15:28, Jim Fulton j...@zope.com wrote: This might be OK for @implements and maybe @adapts, which describe behavior, but start feeling wonky to me for something like: @utility. Well, the wonkyness comes from @utility *not* being inherited, while @implements would be. That

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Jim Fulton
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: On 03/21/2011 03:28 PM, Jim Fulton wrote: I don't know what the right answer is ... at least not yet. :) In Django and sqlalchemy declarative a meta class is used for this kind of configuration. Since that is

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Martijn Faassen
On 03/21/2011 04:08 PM, Jim Fulton wrote: On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: On 03/21/2011 03:28 PM, Jim Fulton wrote: I don't know what the right answer is ... at least not yet. :) In Django and sqlalchemy declarative a meta class is used for

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Chris McDonough
On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 15:53 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote: On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 15:28, Jim Fulton j...@zope.com wrote: This might be OK for @implements and maybe @adapts, which describe behavior, but start feeling wonky to me for something like: @utility. Well, the wonkyness comes from

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Shane Hathaway
On 03/21/2011 10:59 AM, Chris McDonough wrote: On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 15:53 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote: It's easy and clear, but has the drawback of encouraging that registration is done on import time, while scanning separates the registration from the definition. I'm not sure how important

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Jim Fulton
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote: On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 15:53 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote: ... It's easy and clear, but has the drawback of encouraging that registration is done on import time, while scanning separates the registration from the

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Chris McDonough
On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 14:13 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote: On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 15:53 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote: ... It's easy and clear, but has the drawback of encouraging that registration is done on import time,

Re: [Zope-dev] Non-ZCML config for ZCA. (Was: Anyone want to do Google Summer of code mentoring for PSF?)

2011-03-21 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/21/2011 02:13 PM, Jim Fulton wrote: On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote: On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 15:53 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote: ... It's easy and clear, but has the drawback of encouraging that

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: zcml filtering

2008-08-08 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Marius Gedminas wrote: On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Martin Aspeli wrote: Subscribers and subscription adapters are particularly bad in this way, since they are unnamed and thus can't be overridden, only amended to. We've talked about

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: zcml filtering

2008-08-06 Thread Stephan Richter
On Wednesday 06 August 2008, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: I'm working on a package for this functionality in z3c.unconfigure right now. Name inspired by Martin's suggestion above; my original prototype used had a different name but this is much better :). Couldn't we just merge

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: zcml filtering

2008-08-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
El 6 Aug 2008, a las 16:47 , Stephan Richter escribió: On Wednesday 06 August 2008, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: I'm working on a package for this functionality in z3c.unconfigure right now. Name inspired by Martin's suggestion above; my original prototype used had a different name but

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: zcml filtering

2008-08-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
El 6 Aug 2008, a las 17:17 , Roger Ineichen escribió: I'm +1 on zc.configuration. z3c.unconfigure, however, will contain zope.component specific code to unconfigure subscribers (which currently have no useful discriminator). So it's a hack to make it work with existing Zope code out there. If

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: zcml entry points

2007-10-22 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hey, On 10/20/07, Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Zope 2 had (for products) all three things together. It was felt that this was a too tight coupling. Therefore, for Zope 3 the paradigma explicit is better than implicit (a paradigma, that I personally dislike and find wrong)

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: zcml entry points

2007-10-20 Thread Dieter Maurer
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2007-10-20 03:15 +0200: ... 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

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: zcml entry points

2007-10-19 Thread Stephan Richter
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,

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: zcml entry points

2007-10-18 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Martin Aspeli wrote: Fred Drake wrote: On 10/17/07, Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A common issue we are seeing is that we have eggs depending on each other, but they still need to load the zcml from those dependencies somehow. As a temporary solution to play with the

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: zcml entry points

2007-10-18 Thread Jim Fulton
On Oct 17, 2007, at 8:04 PM, Ross Patterson wrote: ... I'm new to eggs, but maybe both sides could be satisfied with an approach like extra_requires? Extras are evil. See other posts of mine for explanations of why. You could list oi.plum [zope.zcml] when you require oi.plum *and* its ZCML

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: zcml entry points

2007-10-18 Thread Chris McDonough
On Oct 18, 2007, at 8:17 AM, 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. I think that the library vs. pluggable application distinction is valid here: maybe you want to define an entry point in

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: zcml entry points

2007-10-17 Thread Fred Drake
On 10/17/07, Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The main win, IMHO, is to avoid the requirement for people to install slugs for third party products. Slugs suck - they are confusing to explain and people forget them all the time. Buildout makes it a bit easier, but it's still not a

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: zcml entry points

2007-10-17 Thread Fred Drake
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

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: ZCML and 'zopectl test'?

2007-01-07 Thread Paul Winkler
On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 12:14:32PM +0100, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: So, there are two options: - modify the setUp() of the tests in question to provideUtility(your_utility) - make the respective tests run in a layer that loads the ZCML. I don't think layer support is on the trunk

Re: [Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-20 Thread Chris Withers
Martijn Faassen wrote: Anyway, while I have my criticisms of ZCML, too much typing is really not very important in my list. You can get it somewhat shorter, I'm sure, but not *that* much shorter. I'd worry more about the reading part than the writing. More typing = more reading in my books, so

Re: [Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-20 Thread Chris Withers
Stephan Richter wrote: Can you be more specific? I think ZCML is very compact. Well, I'm hoping to take a proper look at the latest Z3 some time soon, so I'll let you know after that and shut up on the subject in the meantime ;-) cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python

Re: [Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-08 Thread Chris Withers
Lennart Regebro wrote: You know the feeling when a third party product has the wrong permission or no permission at all on something? What are you gonna do? Subclass: Lots of work. Patch: You gotta keep it updated. With ZCML, you override it. TADA! Yes, this is all stuff I know and love about Z3

Re: [Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-08 Thread Martijn Faassen
Chris Withers wrote: Lennart Regebro wrote: You know the feeling when a third party product has the wrong permission or no permission at all on something? What are you gonna do? Subclass: Lots of work. Patch: You gotta keep it updated. With ZCML, you override it. TADA! Yes, this is all stuff I

Re: [Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-08 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Apr 8, 2005 12:54 PM, Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chris Withers wrote: Lennart Regebro wrote: You know the feeling when a third party product has the wrong permission or no permission at all on something? What are you gonna do? Subclass: Lots of work. Patch: You gotta

Re: [Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-08 Thread Jim Fulton
Lennart Regebro wrote: On Apr 8, 2005 12:54 PM, Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... A benefit of using an XML format is that many editors will happily both do syntax high-lighting, some sort of auto-indentation, and automatic commenting/uncommenting. A non-standard syntax wouldn't do

Re: [Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-08 Thread Stephan Richter
On Friday 08 April 2005 03:24, Chris Withers wrote: Yes, this is all stuff I know and love about Z3 ;-);-) When I last saw ZCML, it was horrible though. I don't mind XML, just not if it lots of pointless typing... Can you be more specific? I think ZCML is very compact. Regards, Stephan --

Re: [Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-08 Thread Stephan Richter
On Friday 08 April 2005 07:34, Lennart Regebro wrote: For me, the main drawback with ZCML is that WingIDE doesn't to auto completion on it. ;) An ZCML editor that automatically popped up a list of the supported keywords for every statement would be really nice. :-p: Yeah, I talked to Stephan

Re: [Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-08 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Apr 8, 2005 3:09 PM, Stephan Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Friday 08 April 2005 07:34, Lennart Regebro wrote: For me, the main drawback with ZCML is that WingIDE doesn't to auto completion on it. ;) An ZCML editor that automatically popped up a list of the supported keywords for

Re: [Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-08 Thread Martijn Faassen
Lennart Regebro wrote: [snip] For me, the main drawback with ZCML is that WingIDE doesn't to auto completion on it. ;) An ZCML editor that automatically popped up a list of the supported keywords for every statement would be really nice. :-p Actually emacs + nxml + the Relax NG schema

Re: [Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-07 Thread Jim Fulton
Chris Withers wrote: Richard Jones wrote: Is this a general trend for Zope 2? I'd rather see Zope 2 kinda avoid ZCML if possible. It's just one of those personal preference things, I suppose, but I know I'm not the only one who isn't that enamored of the ZCML approach. I actually like having

Re: [Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-07 Thread Lennart Regebro
Richard Jones wrote: Is this a general trend for Zope 2? I'd rather see Zope 2 kinda avoid ZCML if possible. It's just one of those personal preference things, I suppose, but I know I'm not the only one who isn't that enamored of the ZCML approach. ZCML started out for me (and as an experinced