Re: [Zope3-dev] Splitting package configuration
On Wednesday 23 May 2007 12:24, Fred Drake wrote: > "Official story" doesn't mean a lot to me these days. I think of > individual ZCML files as interface points: someone might reasonably be > using them directly (unless the filename starts with an underscore). But you are describing the internal ZC thinking here, certainly not something that has been widely or publically communicated. There are very few people out there using eggs. Most download a release, create an instance and drop the add-on packages in there, some using SETUP.cfg and others creating/copying the slugs by hand. > > I hope it is avoidable with the above insight. > > Again, if you think there's an official story that involves > *requiring* people to rely on those nasty slug files, you're deluding > yourself. We've always maintained that those are "convenience" (for > some definition of "wouldn't you like to shoot yourself in the > foot?"). But this is how the latest release and trunk works! All of my projects still work this way. Nowhere else is a different process documented. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Splitting package configuration
On 5/23/07, Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Thinking about it more, it would actually be backward-compatible, since we never released the packages in themselves but always as part of the Zope 3 bundle. Also, even the packages that are not hooked in via zope.app.zcmlfiles are added via the automated SETUP.cfg stuff. At least this is the official story right now. :-) "Official story" doesn't mean a lot to me these days. I think of individual ZCML files as interface points: someone might reasonably be using them directly (unless the filename starts with an underscore). I hope it is avoidable with the above insight. Again, if you think there's an official story that involves *requiring* people to rely on those nasty slug files, you're deluding yourself. We've always maintained that those are "convenience" (for some definition of "wouldn't you like to shoot yourself in the foot?"). Really? That would be a pitty, because it would allow us to have one release with the old and the new way, so the first people can migrate. Would be a pity, yes, but it'll never happen if we keep changing it. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. "Chaos is the score upon which reality is written." --Henry Miller ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Splitting package configuration
On Wednesday 23 May 2007 11:07, Fred Drake wrote: > On 5/23/07, Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This solution would not be fully backward-compatible with people > > including package "configure.zcml" files manually. I think this is okay, > > since people often do not even want the browser stuff. > > That's hard to predict; some do, some don't, I don't know where "most" > happens to fall. Thinking about it more, it would actually be backward-compatible, since we never released the packages in themselves but always as part of the Zope 3 bundle. Also, even the packages that are not hooked in via zope.app.zcmlfiles are added via the automated SETUP.cfg stuff. At least this is the official story right now. :-) > > A fully backward solution would be to put all the generic package > > configuration in a new ZCML file and combine them both in > > "configure.zcml". However, I find that solution very undesirable, so I > > hope noone will like it either. :-) > > I don't like that, but I don't think it's avoidable. I hope it is avoidable with the above insight. > 3.4 is never going to be released, is it? That might bother some > people (though not me). Really? That would be a pitty, because it would allow us to have one release with the old and the new way, so the first people can migrate. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Splitting package configuration
On 5/23/07, Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This solution would not be fully backward-compatible with people including package "configure.zcml" files manually. I think this is okay, since people often do not even want the browser stuff. That's hard to predict; some do, some don't, I don't know where "most" happens to fall. A fully backward solution would be to put all the generic package configuration in a new ZCML file and combine them both in "configure.zcml". However, I find that solution very undesirable, so I hope noone will like it either. :-) I don't like that, but I don't think it's avoidable. I would like to get this change started as soon as possible to make it work for Zope 3.4. If noone objects, I will start with this in a few days. 3.4 is never going to be released, is it? That might bother some people (though not me). -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. "Chaos is the score upon which reality is written." --Henry Miller ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Splitting package configuration
On 23.05.2007, at 14:04, Stephan Richter wrote: Hi everyone, I built my first Zope 3 instance with buildout yesterday. After I got an initial version working, I found it pretty lame to use "zope.app.zcmlfiles". With "zope.app.zcmlfiles" I had 100 eggs without it 84 eggs (this is somewhat project-specific.) However, I had to add several unneeded dependencies, because the main "configure.zcml" of a package usually also includes the browser "configure.zcml". For example, I have a dependency on "zope.app.form", just because "zope.app.securitypolicy" (and other packages) create old-style forms. In fact, I do not even use anything declared in "IDefaultBrowserLayer", so any browser "configure.zcml" is totally overhead for in this case. In fact, anyone creating a new skin from scratch will want to avoid the same overhead. +1 on the zcml splitting note that the eggs still will have the same dependencies in setup.py, so the packages will be installed. I think the solution can be very simple and be effectively backward- compatible for most cases: 1. Do not include the browser "configure.zcml" files in the main "configure.zcml" of that package. 2. (a) If the package has a SETUP.cfg and "package-configure.zcml", then add the browser "configure.zcml" include to that "package-configure.zcml". (b) If the package is currently loaded via "zope.app.zcmlfiles"'s "configure.zcml", then we will add the browser "configure.zcml" there. This solution would not be fully backward-compatible with people including package "configure.zcml" files manually. I think this is okay, since people often do not even want the browser stuff. A fully backward solution would be to put all the generic package configuration in a new ZCML file and combine them both in "configure.zcml". However, I find that solution very undesirable, so I hope noone will like it either. :-) I would like to get this change started as soon as possible to make it work for Zope 3.4. If noone objects, I will start with this in a few days. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/bernd.dorn% 40lovelysystems.com ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Splitting package configuration
Hi everyone, I built my first Zope 3 instance with buildout yesterday. After I got an initial version working, I found it pretty lame to use "zope.app.zcmlfiles". With "zope.app.zcmlfiles" I had 100 eggs without it 84 eggs (this is somewhat project-specific.) However, I had to add several unneeded dependencies, because the main "configure.zcml" of a package usually also includes the browser "configure.zcml". For example, I have a dependency on "zope.app.form", just because "zope.app.securitypolicy" (and other packages) create old-style forms. In fact, I do not even use anything declared in "IDefaultBrowserLayer", so any browser "configure.zcml" is totally overhead for in this case. In fact, anyone creating a new skin from scratch will want to avoid the same overhead. I think the solution can be very simple and be effectively backward-compatible for most cases: 1. Do not include the browser "configure.zcml" files in the main "configure.zcml" of that package. 2. (a) If the package has a SETUP.cfg and "package-configure.zcml", then add the browser "configure.zcml" include to that "package-configure.zcml". (b) If the package is currently loaded via "zope.app.zcmlfiles"'s "configure.zcml", then we will add the browser "configure.zcml" there. This solution would not be fully backward-compatible with people including package "configure.zcml" files manually. I think this is okay, since people often do not even want the browser stuff. A fully backward solution would be to put all the generic package configuration in a new ZCML file and combine them both in "configure.zcml". However, I find that solution very undesirable, so I hope noone will like it either. :-) I would like to get this change started as soon as possible to make it work for Zope 3.4. If noone objects, I will start with this in a few days. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
