Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: skin support for xmlrpc
Christian Zagrodnick wrote at 2007-9-18 08:35 +0200: On 2007-09-16 09:03:47 +0200, Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Ok, then I suggest: * Provide an IRequestType interface in zope.publisher Does this name sound wrong? It suggests the the interface has to do with request types, maybe browser, xmlrpc, ... It that what we want? IAPIType? IApi? IHTTPApiType? /me is confused again. :/ Me, too. Terms are very important for me -- and I could not understand RequestType. What should it mean that zope.publisher provides an IRequestType. What types are these? Do you mean types in the sense of browser requests, xml-rpc requests, ftp requests, ... or something else? -- Dieter ___ 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: skin support for xmlrpc
Christian Zagrodnick wrote at 2007-9-15 12:34 +0200: ... Ok, then I suggest: * Provide an IRequestType interface in zope.publisher Does this name sound wrong? It suggests the the interface has to do with request types, maybe browser, xmlrpc, ... It that what we want? -- Dieter ___ 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: skin support for xmlrpc
On 13.09.2007, at 18:07, Roger Ineichen wrote: Hi Betreff: [Zope3-dev] Re: skin support for xmlrpc On 13.09.2007, at 17:28, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Christian Theune wrote: Let me propose a change: 1. We revert the change. Any news on this? Yes. Over the last few days I pondered about how to do it without xmlrpc layers. But there doesn't seem to be a way nice and easy way. So I will need to implement the layer support in a different package. The revert will be done till monday, maybe already tomorrow. Sorry for the delay. Anyway, could somebody who had an error with that tell me what the problem was? I just heard we had a problem. Why revert? We need layers in every kind of context, request adapter registration because it's the concept which permission get registered in different projects on a single server sharing packages. The problem is simple, XML-RPC has used the IBrowserRequest and now it uses the IXMLRPCRequest. This is why the XML-RPC views in different projects don't work anymore. This means the XML-RPC uses a browser request which is bad because it enables the views everywhere. No no. XML-RPC did use IXMLRPCRequest before. All I added was the IXMLRPCSkinType which did not exist. What I also changed is the ++skin++ traverser which was registered for * instead of IBrowserRequest. But I consider the old behaviour a bug since skins were only valid with IBrowserRequest. The solution is to provide the request interface which was the default before the changes. But don't take the option way to use other request interface then the default for registration. I'll need it. Because I'll take care on security and don't like to register everything on whatever. Before I'll revert the layer-support will be there in a third party package, probably using ++api++. -- Christian Zagrodnick gocept gmbh co. kg · forsterstrasse 29 · 06112 halle/saale www.gocept.com · fon. +49 345 12298894 · fax. +49 345 12298891 PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ 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: skin support for xmlrpc
Am Freitag, den 14.09.2007, 02:49 -0400 schrieb Fred Drake: On 9/14/07, Christian Zagrodnick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Before I'll revert the layer-support will be there in a third party package, probably using ++api++. Better to be specific than general when it's for a specific type of request; why not ++xmlrpc++? Unless ++api++ is for more than XML-RPC support; perhaps it should be for IHTTPRequest? I'd actually rather avoid a proliferation of ++namespace++ usages myself, and prefer ++api++ for IHTTPRequest. +1 -- gocept gmbh co. kg - forsterstrasse 29 - 06112 halle/saale - germany www.gocept.com - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - phone +49 345 122 9889 7 - fax +49 345 122 9889 1 - zope and plone consulting and development signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ 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: skin support for xmlrpc
On 14.09.2007, at 08:49, Fred Drake wrote: On 9/14/07, Christian Zagrodnick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Before I'll revert the layer-support will be there in a third party package, probably using ++api++. Better to be specific than general when it's for a specific type of request; why not ++xmlrpc++? Unless ++api++ is for more than XML-RPC support; perhaps it should be for IHTTPRequest? I'd actually rather avoid a proliferation of ++namespace++ usages myself, and prefer ++api++ for IHTTPRequest. So you're suggesting using ++api++ to choose the request type for all IHTTPRequests. That's fine for me. I just wonder why I should remove the skin support for XML-RPC since that is just choosing the request type... /me is confused. -- Christian Zagrodnick gocept gmbh co. kg · forsterstrasse 29 · 06112 halle/saale www.gocept.com · fon. +49 345 12298894 · fax. +49 345 12298891 PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ 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: skin support for xmlrpc
hi christian, On 24.08.2007, at 15:12, Stephan Richter wrote: On Friday 24 August 2007 02:37, Christian Zagrodnick wrote: The term skin is probably missleading but was taken to keep it simple. It's more an api-set. Then don't use it! Misusing a concept can lead to a lot of confusion. it's misleading for me as well :) Usecase: Different API on the same server We have a lot XML-RPC methods defined for ISite which get all their data in. This is quite unlike one would register XML-RPC mehtods normally, but the clients using the interface are not sophisticated enough. Now there are different systems talking with Zope. The systems have some things in common, some not. One systems calls a method, say list_foo anonymous, while another needs to authenticate for list_foo. The idea is now to register list_foo for different layers/skins/api-sets. This could also be achieved by creating dummy model-objects and/or traversers, but would be much less understandable. What essentially happens is that the views are registered for different request types. You can solve this issue easily using pluggable traversers. There is absolutely no need to use skins here. For example, a traverser plugin can simply mark the request with a directly provided interface and return the same object. This would work very much like a skin without mis- using the concept. for me xmlrpc is remote procedure call. a rpc has a signature and always the same result. and as stephan said - traversers should help here. Usecase: Authenticate Users depending on the skin As i said before there are different systems which need to authenticate. The systems have disjunctive sets of users with potentially the same login names. There needs to be a way to authenticate without guessing which set of users we're talking about. This could also be achieved by a custom traverser or namespace. Then use a custom traverser, please!? :-) +1 It probably would not be much of a problem to remove the skin things again and put it directly to the project or another third-party component. But it doesn't feel right. Please revert the skin support again. This is a pretty major change and I gave a -1 on the original discussion already. There was never a full proposal either. -1 from here as well. jodok 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/batlogg.lists% 40lovelysystems.com -- In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess. -- The Zen of Python, by Tim Peters Jodok Batlogg, Lovely Systems Schmelzhütterstraße 26a, 6850 Dornbirn, Austria phone: +43 5572 908060, fax: +43 5572 908060-77 smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
