Jim Fulton wrote:
> Maybe, but I find that people confuse the machinery in zope.publisher  
> with a bunch of additional and very confusing machinery in various  
> zope.app packages.  The publisher itself is pretty simple.  I think  
> this is illustrated by paste.txt in the zope.publisher package.  That  
> isn't to say there might not be better models.

I see what you're saying and I agree that the zope.publisher package by 
itself is fairly simple.  However, zope.publisher by itself isn't very 
useful (except in tests), yet zope.publisher doesn't provide all the 
kinds of extension facilities that other packages require.  This has led 
to messy code, starting with zope.app.publication.

Furthermore, I'm not sure anyone can foresee all the ways people need to 
extend zope.publisher.  I think we need a more powerful abstraction.

>  Hopefully, I'll find  
> time to study your pipeline ideas. I wish there was a proposal I could  
> read rather than reading code.

I am close to being able to formulate a proposal.  The concept is 
simple: move most publisher functionality into WSGI pipeline stages, 
similar to Repoze.  WSGI pipeline stages are very simple and powerful. 
I had to work out a way to build pipelines with replaceable stages, but 
I think I've almost solved that.


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