Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Zope Configuration Processing and Side Effects
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: At: http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ZopeConfigurationProcessingAndSideEffects I've written an informational proposal stating the goal for eliminating side effects, other than import, during the first phase of configuration processing and generally minimizing first phase processing. This will lead toward refactoring most existing configuration directives. I don't expect this to be controversial, but comments are welcome. You only mention one example for side effects (putting a global object into a module and using them later), so I presume that the refactorings will mainly be targeting this case. This is really the only case (other than import) that I can think of. I may be forgetting something. Note that I also proposed moving as much processing into actions as possible, to avoid doing unnecessary work when actions are discarded. Do you already have specific plans on how to move the path resolving/validating into the handlers, I don't plan to move it into handlers. I plan t move it into actions. :) But you raise a good point. We were able to simplify handler implementation using schemas to do much error checking upstream of handlers. Now, by actually moving this downstream into the actions, we'll end up putting more work on handler/action implementors. This is a downside of the proposal. I'll note: 1. When we made ZCML use schemas for upstream validation, we made it *much* slower, so this was a mixed blessing. 2. Making it much easier to implement configuration handlers and actions is important when there are many different handlers and actions. This was true when we moved to schema-based configuration but now many of us would like to see a smaller selection of configuration options. Note that we could probably provide some helper functions that provide a similar level of automation downstream. For example, something like: def importGlobal(id, info): Try to import a global object for the given identifier On success, the imported object is returned. On failure, an exception is raised that includes information from the passed configuration info object, such as configuration file name and line number. and how to provide backward compatibility for 3rd-party directives? I don't anticipate doing anything to break old directives, so I don't see a backward compatibility issue. Right now the proposal is quite high-level... Yes, that's true. That's because it simply states a goal. It also proposes that some specific directives be reworked, which should serve to highlight issues/problems if any. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Re: Zope Configuration Processing and Side Effects
Jim Fulton wrote: At: http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ZopeConfigurationProcessingAndSideEffects I've written an informational proposal stating the goal for eliminating side effects, other than import, during the first phase of configuration processing and generally minimizing first phase processing. This will lead toward refactoring most existing configuration directives. I don't expect this to be controversial, but comments are welcome. You only mention one example for side effects (putting a global object into a module and using them later), so I presume that the refactorings will mainly be targeting this case. Do you already have specific plans on how to move the path resolving/validating into the handlers, and how to provide backward compatibility for 3rd-party directives? Right now the proposal is quite high-level... Philipp ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Zope Configuration Processing and Side Effects
On Sunday 22 October 2006 14:21, Jim Fulton wrote: 2. Making it much easier to implement configuration handlers and actions is important when there are many different handlers and actions. This was true when we moved to schema-based configuration but now many of us would like to see a smaller selection of configuration options. I think the desire to have a smaller set of configuration options is due to the fact that a lot of teams work pretty much in a Python developer environment. In the two projects I am involved in, there is a desire to develop high-level configuration directives to allow another audience to do customization and integration. Zope 3 Developers (be it core Python or template integration developers) are a real scarce at this point, so we need to find solutions to make other developers productive without them knowing the dirt about Zope 3. Thus, I would really hate to see ZCML directive creation to become more difficult. But then, you (Jim) said that you want to be BBB, so I am not worried. 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
[Zope3-dev] Re: Zope Configuration Processing and Side Effects
Baiju M wrote: I have added this page to new wiki: http://zope3.zwiki.org/ZopeConfigurationProcessingAndSideEffects Also updated the index, http://zope3.zwiki.org/Zope3Proposals Thank you, Baiju. Let's use new wiki now onwards. Sooner or later this will be wiki.zope.org We have to make current wiki read only very soon. How do you feel about this folks ? I'd like to make the old zope 3 wiki read-only and activate the subscriptions on the new one. A small but good step forward from the present situation of two identical writable wikis. ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Zope Configuration Processing and Side Effects
Simon Michael wrote: Baiju M wrote: Let's use new wiki now onwards. Sooner or later this will be wiki.zope.org We have to make current wiki read only very soon. How do you feel about this folks ? I'd like to make the old zope 3 wiki read-only and activate the subscriptions on the new one. +1 -- Benji York Senior Software Engineer Zope Corporation ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Zope Configuration Processing and Side Effects
On 10/21/06, Simon Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How do you feel about this folks ? I'd like to make the old zope 3 wiki read-only and activate the subscriptions on the new one. A small but good step forward from the present situation of two identical writable wikis. The new wiki is much nicer to work with; thanks, Simon! -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr.fdrake at gmail.com Every sin is the result of a collaboration. --Lucius Annaeus Seneca ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
