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.


Zope-CMF maillist  -

See for bug reports and feature requests

Reply via email to