Shaun Cutts said the following on 2006-02-14 07:37:
Martin,
Here here! I'm just learning to cross the gap starting from the RDBMS
side. Just our initial deployment will have a DB growing by about 30K
numbers per day, day in and day out. There are various workflows that
are driven by this data. T
Martin,
Here here! I'm just learning to cross the gap starting from the RDBMS
side. Just our initial deployment will have a DB growing by about 30K
numbers per day, day in and day out. There are various workflows that
are driven by this data. The parts of these that need people are now
supposed to
Hello,
I’m new here.. almost certainly these comments are off-base… then
again, sometimes an idea “from outside” can be helpful. So here’s
a crazy thought before I go to bed….
I wonder if the configuration done by zcml
might not be better if it resided inside a ZODB, and was manipul
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> I want to evolve ZCML as it is right now, this might mean removing
> directives, changing directives, consolidating directives, adding
> directives, removing some namespaces, consolidating some namespaces,
> even adding some namespaces.
Fair enough. I'm already looking for
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> I don't see the problem with learning new ZCML directives when I'm
> learning a new package. I can see why you'd like to reduce the
> occurence, and I think sometimes configuring things in ZCML is actually
> doing it in the wrong place, as information needs to be persistent
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> > No. But I don't think that it'll be much of a problem. I expect that not a
> > lot of 3rd party packages will need their own set of ZCML directives.
>
> Currently I know of five and union.cms doing it. I'm certainly
> considering doing so for Silva. Then there's the examp
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Prefixing 'browser' directives in the tag names to me is a big warning
> bell that you really do want to use different namespaces. Another
> example of the namespace mechanism working is that some people are using
> it in their projects, adding namespaces specific to their
Quick in-and-out from a lurker: yesterday as I was learning how to use
Five with Plone, I thought to myself, wouldn't it be cool if there
were two directives, cmf:installable and cmf:registerContentClass?
This is from someone who's totally naive about zcml. Was this evil on
my part? Because the deb
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> > Lennart Regebro wrote:
> >
> >>Uhm. -1, actually. I think getting things out of ZCML is a good idea,
> >>but I think this shoots slightly beside the goal. This proposal aims
> >>mostly at getting rid of statements that can be done with o
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> I would like to highlight Lennart's point. We need to be very careful
> here. We would only have an illusion of improvement if we'd end up with
> less directives but more long dotted names into Python packages. I'd
> argue that this might make ZCML *harder* to understand, n
On Monday 13 February 2006 15:21, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> > But my main question is: How will you be able to do this? :-) I could see
> > a special hook into the adapter lookup. But then you would just get every
> > adapter lookup sorted chronically. Will that be helpful? I think we would
> > have
On 2/13/06, Sidnei da Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Someone argued in the python-brasil list that "let's do more of those"
> actually refers to 'one honking great idea', thus meaning "let's do
> more of those great ideas (like namespaces)".
This is the first time I've heard that interpretatio
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 07:51:34 -, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Scripts and RBDMS are the fast food of the web development world, not
the salad. Looks nice, tastes great, eventually leaves you fat and
unhealthy. ZODB and maybe an ORM is the greens for me, it might not be
to e
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 03:31:49PM -0500, Tres Seaver wrote:
| This is why Python has namespaces, too:
|
| >>> import this
| ...
| Namespaces are one honking great idea -- let's do more of those!
Someone argued in the python-brasil list that "let's do more of those"
actually refers to 'one hon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Tres Seaver wrote:
>>I'm not arguing (here) against refactoring the namespaces in which
>>"core" directives are declared. I'm arguing against the idea that
>>namespaces are bad in general.
>
>
> I'm not arguing
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 10:18:24AM -0700, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> I want a way to inspect all of the indirections chosen in the course of
> a web request or any other publishing operation. After executing a web
> request, Zope will report all of the points where it made a decision
> using the c
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Monday 13 February 2006 12:18, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Thoughts? Will it work? Should it be a priority?
I like the idea a lot and you could reuse quiet a bit of apidoc code to
produce some nice output.
But my main question is: How will you be able to do this? :-)
Gary Poster zope.com> writes:
>
>
> On Feb 13, 2006, at 10:05 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
>
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Stephan Richter wrote:
> >> On Monday 13 February 2006 08:36, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> [...]
>
> +1 to Stephan's comment, Tres' commen
On Monday 13 February 2006 12:18, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Thoughts? Will it work? Should it be a priority?
I like the idea a lot and you could reuse quiet a bit of apidoc code to
produce some nice output.
But my main question is: How will you be able to do this? :-) I could see a
special hook
Philipp von Weitershausen weitershausen.de> writes:
> > I'm not arguing (here) against refactoring the namespaces in which
> > "core" directives are declared. I'm arguing against the idea that
> > namespaces are bad in general.
>
> I'm not arguing that either. I'm just saying that one namespac
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:59:32 +0100 Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
>
>> I've being working on integrating Balazs Ree's CTAL interpreter recently
>> (added tests, fixes, etc.). CTAL is the equivalent of TAL but for
>> javascript.
>
> I just googled around for this, and couldn't
Philipp von Weitershausen weitershausen.de> writes:
> The problem is uncontrolled ZCML directive proliferation. It's "bad" enough
> that you have to familiarize yourself with a new API when dealing with a 3rd
> party Zope package. But having to learn a new set of ZCML directives?!? I
> think many
Martijn Faassen infrae.com> writes:
> >>What happens if you want to add your own statements? Should you still
> >>do that in your own namespace?
> >
> >
> > No. But I don't think that it'll be much of a problem. I expect that not a
lot
> > of 3rd party packages will need their own set of ZCML
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Windows 2000
zc-bbwin3.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 3063
Blamelist: niemeyer
BUILD FAILED: failed failed slave lost
sincerely,
-The Buildbot
_
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
I've being working on integrating Balazs Ree's CTAL interpreter
recently (added tests, fixes, etc.). CTAL is the equivalent of TAL
but for javascript.
I just googled around for this, and couldn't find it, but I'm
intrigued. Any link?
A f
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
I've being working on integrating Balazs Ree's CTAL interpreter recently
(added tests, fixes, etc.). CTAL is the equivalent of TAL but for
javascript.
I just googled around for this, and couldn't find it, but I'm intrigued.
Any link?
A few years ago on a whim I s
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Lennart Regebro wrote:
Uhm. -1, actually. I think getting things out of ZCML is a good idea,
but I think this shoots slightly beside the goal. This proposal aims
mostly at getting rid of statements that can be done with other
statetements, but using more lines.
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 2/13/06, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all,
looking for your comments at
http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ReducingTheAmountOfZCMLDirectives :)
This is a "formal" follow-up on my blog post on ZCML a while back
(http://www.z3lab.org/sections/blogs/ph
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Stephan Richter wrote:
As we have learned that we can reduce nearly all component tasks to
adapters and utilities, many tasks revolving around registration and
configuration of policy also only involve adapters and utilities. By using
those "elementary" directiv
Hey,
Good comments, Tres, thanks.
Regards,
Martijn
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Stephan Richter wrote:
- You do not argue how the decision-making process is "highly inconsistent".
Fair enough. I will update the proposal later. Supper first :).
- I do not understand what's so bad about coming up with your 3rd-party ZCML
directives. The
Here's another idea that occurred to me recently. I suspect this one
needs no vote, but perhaps it should be done sooner than other ideas
like the filesystem-based web root.
I want a way to inspect all of the indirections chosen in the course of
a web request or any other publishing operation
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 2/13/06, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yet again looking for comments, this time at:
http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/OneNamespaceForZCML.
What happens if you want to add your own statements? Should you still
do that
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Yet again looking for comments, this time at:
http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/OneNamespaceForZCML.
-1.
Prefixing 'browser' directives in the tag names to me is a big warning
bell that you really do want to use different namespaces. Another
example of the namespace
Tres Seaver wrote:
- The opposition to namespace declarations is whiny, as they are the
standard way to make XML extensible. Unless we are going to quit
using XML, outlawing namespaces would be equivalent to saying, "you
may not extend ZCML"; I don't think we are smart enoug
Hi Martin,
as one of the "2nd wave of Zope3-guys" (which means my
business is app development/maintaining in a day2day-Job,
not developing the core) I assure you that the Z3-Ship
is in safe waters since autumn 2005 - the 3.2 release.
Since I work with Plone 2.1 AND Zope3.2 (for different projects
Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tonico Strasser wrote:
I'm interested in your opinion about parameters for macros.
Do you think this is explicit enough?:
Or do you think explicit parameters would make things clearer?:
I don't favor "expli
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Tres Seaver wrote:
>
>> - The opposition to namespace declarations is whiny, as they are the
>> standard way to make XML extensible. Unless we are going to quit
>> using XML, outlawing namespaces would be equiva
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tonico Strasser wrote:
> I'm interested in your opinion about parameters for macros.
>
> Do you think this is explicit enough?:
>
>
>
>
>
> Or do you think explicit parameters would make things clearer?:
>
>
> metal:with-params="lis
Brian Sutherland wrote:
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 11:54:18AM +0100, Jan-Wijbrand Kolman wrote:
I add this implementation of isConnected to the mysqldbda in my setup
(Zope-2.9 + Five + sqlos, mysql 4.1.12) too, and things *seem* to have
improved. But not completely, every now and then I get the go
Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 2/13/06, Tonico Strasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Looking forward to see explicit ZPTs soon :)
Me too. I'd also like the macros to be called rather than expanded, so
that any error messages report t
On Monday 13 February 2006 10:05, Tres Seaver wrote:
> - I don't want to encourage people to do configuration in Python:
> we have moved away from that *on purpose* in Zope, and I don't see
> a reason to go back. Directives which make it possible to change
> policy decisions without touc
Tres Seaver wrote:
> - The opposition to namespace declarations is whiny, as they are the
>standard way to make XML extensible. Unless we are going to quit
>using XML, outlawing namespaces would be equivalent to saying, "you
>may not extend ZCML"; I don't think we are smart enough to
On Feb 11, 2006, at 9:24 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 10:39:52 -, Lennart Regebro
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
There are methods for neatly deprecating things like this, and they
have been employed consitently in Zope 3, and quite consistetly in
later versions of Zope
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On 2/13/06, Tonico Strasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Looking forward to see explicit ZPTs soon :)
>
>
> Me too. I'd also like the macros to be called rather than expanded, so
> that any error messages report the error
On Feb 13, 2006, at 10:05 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Monday 13 February 2006 08:36, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
[...]
+1 to Stephan's comment, Tres' comment, and Tres' use of the word
"ukase" (which I had to look up)
Stephan Richter wrote:
>>As we have learned that we can reduce nearly all component tasks to
>>adapters and utilities, many tasks revolving around registration and
>>configuration of policy also only involve adapters and utilities. By using
>>those "elementary" directives we can stimulate the learn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Monday 13 February 2006 08:36, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
>
>>As we have learned that we can reduce nearly all component tasks to
>>adapters and utilities, many tasks revolving around registration and
>>configuration
On 2/13/06, Tonico Strasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Looking forward to see explicit ZPTs soon :)
Me too. I'd also like the macros to be called rather than expanded, so
that any error messages report the error in the macro rather than in
an expanded main template. This should be possible if we
Tonico Strasser wrote:
Although you told me that's an anti-pattern, I'll have to use it until I
find a better pattern.
This is true. :)
I can't live without the benefit of reusing macros.
Agreed. I just hope that someone will do the work necessary to create a
better way of doing so.
--
B
On Monday 13 February 2006 08:36, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> As we have learned that we can reduce nearly all component tasks to
> adapters and utilities, many tasks revolving around registration and
> configuration of policy also only involve adapters and utilities. By using
> those "eleme
Benji York wrote:
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
[snip description of cross-template communication]
that's an anti-pattern
Agreed.
Although you told me that's an anti-pattern, I'll have to use it until I
find a better pattern. I can't live without the benefit of reusing macros.
Tonico
__
On 2/13/06, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What internals? That a factory is a utility?
What interfaces to use in which case, and how they all map together.
Adding a page with browser:page is trivial. I don't really care that
you can separately define up a whole host of ada
Stephan Richter wrote:
> - You do not argue how the decision-making process is "highly inconsistent".
Fair enough. I will update the proposal later. Supper first :).
> - I do not understand what's so bad about coming up with your 3rd-party ZCML
> directives. They are extremely easy to write and u
Hi Philipp,
On Monday 13 February 2006 11:08, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> looking for your comments at
> http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ReducingTheAmountOfZCMLDirectives :)
>
> This is a "formal" follow-up on my blog post on ZCML a while back
> (http://www.z3lab.org/sections/blogs/philipp-weiter
On Saturday 11 February 2006 16:50, Jim Fulton wrote:
> - Application developers need to build an application. They will
> generally want fairly tight control over what goes into the
> application. For them, it's valuable to say in an explicit
> way what they want.
>
> - If the applicati
On 2/13/06, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> By choosing decent names for the few directives that will be necessary. I
> know,
> it sounds lame, but even *with* namespace you'd need decent names. Or does
> anything prevent me in my own package to register a ZCML directive ca
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On 2/13/06, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Yet again looking for comments, this time at:
> > http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/OneNamespaceForZCML.
>
> What happens if you want to add your own statements? Should you still
> do that in your own namespace?
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Monday 13 February 2006 06:08, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> > looking for your comments at
> > http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ReducingTheAmountOfZCMLDirectives :)
>
> I am +1 for the proposed directives, in general.
Cool.
> I am waiting for a proposal on the "Potentia
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> I don't think it's about saving lines, but about saving headaches. ;-)
Having to remember how all of the mentioned directives work *does* give me a
headache. I actually remember quite well how the utility and interface
directives work and they are the replacement for most
On Monday 13 February 2006 07:57, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Yet again looking for comments, this time at:
> http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/OneNamespaceForZCML.
-1
Here some comments:
- You do not argue how the decision-making process is "highly inconsistent".
- I do not understand what's so
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
"tal:define" is used here to pass parameters to the macro. In ZPT this
is done implicitly, which is why macros specify a list a variables that
must be defined.
In other language this is done explictly. (cf. XSLT )
If it was done explicitly in ZPT it could look like:
On Monday 13 February 2006 06:08, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> looking for your comments at
> http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ReducingTheAmountOfZCMLDirectives :)
I am +1 for the proposed directives, in general. I am waiting for a proposal
on the "Potential follow-ups" though.
P.S: Please use St
On 2/13/06, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yet again looking for comments, this time at:
> http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/OneNamespaceForZCML.
What happens if you want to add your own statements? Should you still
do that in your own namespace? If not, how are we going to make su
Tonico Strasser wrote:
(Again with the right quote, sorry.)
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
That's exactly what I'm saying: if templates did not try to create
their own data layer, the 'li_repeat' macro could get the data from
the model (instead it has to rely on cross-template communication)
t
On 2/13/06, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sometimes not only using more lines, sometimes only using 2 or 3 more lines.
> I'd say whoever wants to save 2 or 3 lines at the expense of indirection is
> misguided.
I don't think it's about saving lines, but about saving headach
Yet again looking for comments, this time at:
http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/OneNamespaceForZCML.
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope
(Again with the right quote, sorry.)
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
That's exactly what I'm saying: if templates did not try to create their
own data layer, the 'li_repeat' macro could get the data from the model
(instead it has to rely on cross-template communication)
that's an anti-pattern whic
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> Uhm. -1, actually. I think getting things out of ZCML is a good idea,
> but I think this shoots slightly beside the goal. This proposal aims
> mostly at getting rid of statements that can be done with other
> statetements, but using more lines.
Sometimes not only using mor
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
Tonico Strasser wrote:
Hi Jean-Marc!
I agree that a view should not be able to modify the data model. But I
think tal:define is a must have :)
For example: I need tal:define to define names for generic macros:
The 'li_repeat' macro expects the name 'list'.
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
[snip description of cross-template communication]
that's an anti-pattern
Agreed.
--
Benji York
Senior Software Engineer
Zope Corporation
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/opti
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
[snip description of cross-template communication]
that's an anti-pattern
Agreed.
--
Benji York
Senior Software Engineer
Zope Corporation
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/opti
Tonico Strasser wrote:
Hi Jean-Marc!
I agree that a view should not be able to modify the data model. But I
think tal:define is a must have :)
For example: I need tal:define to define names for generic macros:
The 'li_repeat' macro expects the name 'list'.
Tonico
That's exactly wh
Hi Jean-Marc!
I agree that a view should not be able to modify the data model. But I
think tal:define is a must have :)
For example: I need tal:define to define names for generic macros:
The 'li_repeat' macro expects the name 'list'.
Tonico
On 2/13/06, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> looking for your comments at
> http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ReducingTheAmountOfZCMLDirectives :)
>
> This is a "formal" follow-up on my blog post on ZCML a while back
> (http://www.z3lab.org/sections/blogs/philipp-weitersha
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Hi all,
looking for your comments at
http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ReducingTheAmountOfZCMLDirectives :)
+1 for deprecation of the proposed directives.
Also +1 to get rid of 'rdb:gadflyRoot'. I think very few people use
'zope.app.rdb.gadfly' at all since even for
Hi all,
looking for your comments at
http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ReducingTheAmountOfZCMLDirectives :)
This is a "formal" follow-up on my blog post on ZCML a while back
(http://www.z3lab.org/sections/blogs/philipp-weitershausen/2005_12_14_zcml-needs-to-do-less).
I expect there will be more proposals
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Do you mean "_just_ an RDBMS if you so desire"? We don't want to force
people to use an ORM either.
I meant "whatever else anyone wants to use" ;-)
Flat files are everybody's land.
That doesn't mean they're a good idea...
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zo
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Yes, RDBMS would become a first-class citizen. New users would be able
to write some page templates and SQL scripts on the filesystem and have
them work with no extra effort.
Great, you've just re-invented LAMP, but without the years of testing to
make it stable :-/
79 matches
Mail list logo
