-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Chris Withers wrote:
>> Martin Aspeli wrote:
>>> Plone development with Archetypes is not painful. Hundreds of developers
>>> do it, so it can't be that bad.
AT has the classic "Z-shaped curve" in spades: when it does what you
want, it is great, but trying to get it to do something else is painful
>> Urm, that's not true. Archetypes is the single most painful component to
>> use from Plone...
>> It's also the biggest source of frustration I have with Plone.
> Okay. Let me rephrase. Most people don't find it painful, and a huge number
> of developers are being very productive with Archetypes. I know you hate it
> Chris, but you are in the minority.
I don't agree all that often with Chris W, but I find Archetypes an
extremely frustrating framework to work with, an normally avoid it even
when building out sites with it.
It is not exactly a secret that the Archetypes codebase is a mess; its
original authors have abandoned it, pretty much. There are some hardy
souls who will fix bugs in AT, but nobody has stepped up to the problem
of making it play nice with other frameworks, or making it more
maintainable. Trying to find a more palatable replacement for AT is a
perfectly reasonable goal.
> In any case, you may be interested to see some experiments we've been doing
> with using formlib and Zope3-like content types, not using Archetypes. See
> It won't be a full alternative to Archetypes for a while, because AT
> provides functionality that doesn't (yet) have any equivalent outside AT,
> but for simple things it may be worth exploring.
Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -