Hi there,

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:19 PM, Malthe Borch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:

>> Could you be more explicit about what exactly in Grok was making too many
>> assumptions?
> First a word on terminology: I mean Grok, the framework, not the declarative
> extensions to the component architecture (which I simply haven't gotten to
> yet).

> We felt that Grok was too much about object publishing; there's a model and
> a view for that model (and that view has a template). This didn't fit so
> well into our approach.

[snip explanations]

Thanks for those.

> I like Grok and I think it's great for writing Zope *applications*; but we
> didn't find it such a good match for Vudo. I still want to try
> grokcore.component because there are some obvious candidates for declarative
> component setup in a system like ours (content-types, widgets, forms, etc.).

So basically you felt Zope 3 wasn't a good match for Vudo, in the
sense that the normal browser:page wasn't really want you wanted
either, right? Similar to the way you could extend Zope 3 with your
own new ZCML directives to set up the way you'd like views to work
(I'm not sure whether you're doing this), you could as well extend
Grok with your own new grokkers.

I just didn't want Grok singled out here - I don't to leave people
with the impression that Grok locks them into a certain approach any
more than Zope 3-the-application-framework does; I don't believe it
does. Of course Zope 3-the-libraries leave the options more open,
witness this thread. The various grok libraries (martian,
grokcore.component) should be seen as part of this wider ecosystem as

I hope that some of your explorations concerning layouts could be
plugged into Grok as a library eventually.



Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to