Jeff Shell wrote:
[snip lots of good stuff about configuration in python code and its
drawbacks]
But if that were a route one
decided to use, one would have to lay down VERY strict rules.
Otherwise we lose all the benefits of the Component Architecture and
start heading back into a
Alen Stanisic wrote:
On Fri, 2005-12-23 at 11:25 -0500, Stephan Richter wrote:
[...]
ZCML is a great way of getting a quick overview on how things hang
together.
I agree, I found ZCML very useful when trying to learn how Zope3
components work.
Oh humbug. Every time I've wanted to find
On 12/23/05, Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jeff Shell wrote:
I just believe - heavily - after many of my Zope 2 experiences that
configuration as done by ZCML should be as separate from the code
itself as possible. If it's going to be in the same programming
language, it needs
On Thursday 22 December 2005 18:48, Jeff Shell wrote:
Other problems that I've had with Python based configuration in the
past has involved not knowing when to do the configuration. Do I want
to register the class I just defined in the module code?
class Foo(...):
pass
Jeff Shell wrote:
And I think that's where I worry. With ZCML, name resolution happens
very late. This seems to cut down on the problems that I've had with
Zope 2 style configuration. If imports are in the top of the module,
as most developers are used to doing, then they're executed as the
On Thursday 22 December 2005 09:23, Martin Aspeli wrote:
So it's very refreshing to see Zope 3 without ZCML. I hope the trend
continues.
I think Philipp makes what in my limited understanding is a very good
point here:
On Dec 22, 2005, at 12:05 PM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Time and again people fail to realize that Zope 3 wants to create
the low level framework right first, and only after that add high
level simplifications and shortcuts to have less configuration and
provide fastest developer exeperience.
On 22 Dec 2005, at 18:09, Chris McDonough wrote:
On Dec 22, 2005, at 12:05 PM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Time and again people fail to realize that Zope 3 wants to create
the low level framework right first, and only after that add high
level simplifications and shortcuts to have less
[Florent]
Time and again people fail to realize that Zope 3 wants to create
the low level framework right first, and only after that add high
level simplifications and shortcuts to have less configuration and
provide fastest developer exeperience.
Of course people aren't attracted to Zope 3
Chris McDonough wrote:
On Dec 22, 2005, at 12:05 PM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Time and again people fail to realize that Zope 3 wants to create
the low level framework right first, and only after that add high
level simplifications and shortcuts to have less configuration and
provide
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
Shane Hathaway wrote:
...
The problem with ZCML is not the language (XML). Writing the same
description in python would not address such issues as:
- when looking at a component, how can I know how it is wired inside the
application without doing a grep on 100
Jim Fulton wrote:
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
The problem with ZCML is not the language (XML). Writing the same
description in python would not address such issues as:
- when looking at a component, how can I know how it is wired inside
the application without doing a grep on 100 files?
-
On 12/22/05, Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Shane]
Are you sure ZCML is The Right Way? I know its purpose (since I helped
invent Zope 3): to combine configurations by multiple developers without
imposing a particular workflow. However, I maintain that Python code could
do the job
13 matches
Mail list logo