Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 2 Aug 2005, at 13:27, Florent Guillaume wrote:
Tres Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think the discussion around Archetypes, in particular, ended up
stalled over the question of whether to "code generation" design
should be preferred over "configuration-based" design (as found in
CPSSchemas, for instance).
Also now that Zope 3 is taking more and more importance in CMF, any
schema-based solution should be based on Zope 3 schemas. IMO both
Archetypes and CPSSchemas are too big frameworks to include in CMF.
Absolutely. I think at least at the CMF developer level we're in
agreement that the direction is "towards Zope 3 via Five". Any decision
we make about including new code must be made with that in mind.
Which leaves the question, because I simply don't know: What is the
direction Plone is moving in?
the plone developer community is far from monolithic, and i don't claim
to speak for everyone, but i'd say the moving "towards Zope 3 via Five"
is a fair description. the most likely major initial effort here will
probably be to reimplement the Archetypes template system, replacing the
skins template mess that we have currently with an entirely views-based
system. sidnei has already started a "Fate" product that is likely to
be the basis for this effort.
-r
_______________________________________________
Zope-CMF maillist - [email protected]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf
See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests
