On Mar 6, 2006, at 10:44 AM, Andrew Sawyers wrote:
On Mon, 2006-03-06 at 09:45 +, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
Benji York wrote:
Geoff Davis wrote:
* What can we learn from Rails / Django / TurboGears?
Fun presentation along those lines:
http://oodt.jpl.nasa.gov/better-web-app.mov
I
My $.02: I suspect it might be better to just use XML than
configparser as a ZConfig replacement. The config format is a
stretch under CP due to the lack of hierarchy. I'm beginning to
think the don't make admins use XML argument should die. Everybody
knows how to edit XML nowadays,
On Mar 6, 2006, at 9:21 PM, Jake wrote:
I think it is a huge mistake to lose Zope branding. After years of
building up momentum behind a project, to head off into some
strange developer code speak is just going to lose people who are
not intimately involved.
The world, after many years,
On Mar 7, 2006, at 6:56 AM, Chris McDonough wrote:
On Mar 6, 2006, at 9:21 PM, Jake wrote:
I think it is a huge mistake to lose Zope branding. After years of
building up momentum behind a project, to head off into some
strange developer code speak is just going to lose people who are
not
Paul Winkler wrote:
[snip]
I'm hoping to see a similarly interactive, yet long-term-sane,
working style evolve for in zope 3. Maybe we'll get there
with Persisent Modules and fssync.
This is an issue that's important to me, and to Jim. We had a discussion
about all of this in various
Chris McDonough wrote:
My $.02: I suspect it might be better to just use XML than configparser
as a ZConfig replacement. The config format is a stretch under CP due
to the lack of hierarchy. I'm beginning to think the don't make admins
use XML argument should die. Everybody knows how to
Hi everyone,
I usually do not send messages like that, but in light of the recent
discussions about vision, viewing this will give us all some perspective on
what people are looking for:
http://theploneblog.org/archive/2006/03/02/faster-better-cheaper
I think currently Zope 3 would end up a
--On 7. März 2006 06:51:00 -0500 Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My $.02: I suspect it might be better to just use XML than configparser
as a ZConfig replacement. The config format is a stretch under CP due
to the lack of hierarchy. I'm beginning to think the don't make admins
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 07 March 2006 12:28, Andreas Jung wrote:
Writing a parser for some kind of INI format or ZConfig-style parser is an
engineering task for an average programmer..I think we should discuss the
framework and not a particular format (I agree with Dieter: it's
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:
My $.02: I suspect it might be better to just use XML than configparser
as a ZConfig replacement. The config format is a stretch under CP due
to the lack of hierarchy. I'm beginning to think the don't make admins
use XML argument should die.
Stephan Richter wrote:
I usually do not send messages like that, but in light of the recent
discussions about vision, viewing this will give us all some perspective on
what people are looking for:
http://theploneblog.org/archive/2006/03/02/faster-better-cheaper
I think currently Zope 3 would
On Tuesday 07 March 2006 13:27, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Part of the problem is that Zope 3 makes too great a distinction between
developers and scripters. Successful scripters become developers, and
developers often act as scripters. I think the use cases need to see
scripters and developers
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 07 March 2006 13:27, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Part of the problem is that Zope 3 makes too great a distinction between
developers and scripters. Successful scripters become developers, and
developers often act as scripters. I think the use cases need to see
On Tuesday 07 March 2006 13:43, Shane Hathaway wrote:
My vision for the WebDev project is that you can develop WebDev packages
using Zope 2 like features, but the result of the Web development can be
generated into a real Python package.
That might work, but the story breaks down if the
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 07 March 2006 13:43, Shane Hathaway wrote:
My vision for the WebDev project is that you can develop WebDev packages
using Zope 2 like features, but the result of the Web development can be
generated into a real Python package.
That might work, but the story
Shane Hathaway wrote:
It is a beautiful story and I dearly want it to work. But the story
currently has major limitations; developers reach a point where they
have to make a big switch, learn numerous libraries, and rewrite a lot
of their code. How can we fix that?
Part of the problem is
On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 11:27:48AM -0700, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Part of the problem is that Zope 3 makes too great a distinction between
developers and scripters. Successful scripters become developers, and
developers often act as scripters.
+1. The distinction is arbitrary and fluid.
I
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Stephan Richter wrote:
My vision for the WebDev project is that you can develop WebDev
packages using Zope 2 like features, but the result of the Web
development can be generated into a real Python package.
That might work, but the story breaks down if the developer
Paul Everitt wrote:
I still don't think scripters and developers are the same people. I
won't repeat Dan's arguments here, but I think his essay is a valuable
read for understanding an audience that isn't like most zope3-dev people.
Once again this comes down to differing visions. Is Zope
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2006-3-7 01:16 +0100:
Dieter Maurer wrote:
...
While ZConfig allows you the describe related material together
and without indirections, the ConfigParser format forces you
to introduce indirections and to spread related definitions
over a longer area.
Yes,
Fred Drake wrote at 2006-3-6 14:16 -0500:
...
When Tres and I added this, we planned specifically to see how it was
received by the Zope 2 community.
At least, I like it.
...
That said, I don't think Jim's concerns are limited to the Zope
configuration schema, but extend to configurations that
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Paul Everitt wrote:
I still don't think scripters and developers are the same people. I
won't repeat Dan's arguments here, but I think his essay is a valuable
read for understanding an audience that isn't like most zope3-dev people.
Once again this comes down to
On 3/7/06, Stephan Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think currently Zope 3 would end up a little bit better than J2EE, but not
much.
I think it would be better than that. To do Hello World you need to define a
browser:page for=* template=thetempate.pt permission=zope.View /
One situp, no
Paul Everitt wrote:
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Stephan Richter wrote:
My vision for the WebDev project is that you can develop WebDev
packages using Zope 2 like features, but the result of the Web
development can be generated into a real Python package.
That might work, but the story breaks
24 matches
Mail list logo
