Geoff Davis wrote:
On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 17:30:20 +0100, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
It would help everyone if the CMF side opened up a little
more to ideas coming down from Plone, and if the Plone side stopped
reinventing wheels that would be much better off (and benefit
everyone) in the CMF or other non-Plone core products.
Perhaps some specifics would help.
* What wheels do you think Plone has reinvented?
* Are there any particular things in Plone that you think should be pushed
down into CMF?
If you ask me most of the install/setup/migration stuff of Plone is
implemented in the wrong layer. The way Plone uses the CMFDefault
PortalGenerator and customizes CMFDefault settings looks quite strange.
AFAICS Plone could benefit from CMFSetup and CMFSetup could benefit from
the experience Plone people have with install/setup/migration tasks.
CMFSetup still needs a lot of work, but it could became a generic
framework that replaces (at least big parts of) CMFQuickInstallerTool
and the Plone migrations machinery. CPS people already contribute to
In general I'm skeptic if people want to contribute new products. CMF
still needs a lot of consolidation work. And CMF has to be modernized to
benefit from Five features.
I guess the first thing we need is a unit test framework that is more
similar to Zope 3 and Plone tests. Most people not familiar with CMF
unit tests have problems writing new ones. I don't like the idea to
depend on an external product, but maybe CMFTestCase could become part
Just my 2 cents.
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests