Hash: SHA1

Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Jim Fulton wrote:
>> - It's not well enough documented.  While I think there's merit in doing 
>> some things at the WSGI level, I remain pretty happy with the 
>> publication interface for separatating generic publisher functions from 
>> application policies.  I which the use of this API was better 
>> communicated and understood.
> I hope you're not asking me to write documentation for zope.publisher 
> :-), because I only understand the mechanics.  The overall scope and 
> purpose is cloudy to me.  In particular, I don't understand how the 
> publication interface is actually generic.  Does it fit the needs of 
> anything other than Zope?
>> A less major complaint is some baggage from the past. There are a number 
>> of request features that I never use and tend to forget about. The 
>> biggest of these is the special form data unmarshalling and url 
>> manipulation support. (I was amused to read in your introduction to your 
>> pipeline proposal that people wanted to know the answer to the question: 
>> "When does Zope respect the :method form variable?". :)
> FWIW, that particular functionality has been pulled out twice now, both 
> in repoze.monty and zope.httpform.  As a baby step, we could make 
> zope.publisher depend on zope.httpform.  (I made zope.httpform without 
> knowing repoze.monty already existed, but zope.httpform has more tests 
> and interfaces and it's hosted on svn.zope.org, so I think zope.httpform 
> is worth keeping.)

Yup.  repoze.monty should become just a BBB wrapper.

- --
Tres Seaver          +1 540-429-0999          tsea...@palladion.com
Palladion Software   "Excellence by Design"    http://palladion.com
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

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