Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Jim Fulton wrote:
>> I'd rather leave zope.publsiher more or less alone, but develop a new
>> thing that has the basic/core functionality we need and refactor
>> zope.publisher to use that.
> I had the impression Shane was doing that; i.e. building zope.pipeline
> factoring bits out of the publisher but not really changing the
> publisher very much itself, creating a new structure instead. Shane, is
> that correct?
Yes. I think Jim and I are saying the same thing there. The current
code in zope.pipeline doesn't reflect that thinking, though, because we
really need to divide zope.publisher somehow before a project like this
> +1 on the WebOb compatibility. I imagine it should be possible to
> reconstruct our request and response interfaces on top of WebOb's. We
> should also think of ways so that code can get the WebOb request
> directly instead of having to go through these adapters. I'd also be
> much in favor of reusing WebOb's implementation, not just the APIs. I
> think it could help us replace part of the publisher.
That should be a great thing to work on in a sprint.
> Thanks. I'm very much in favor of you guys talking at PyCon if that's
> the best way to make progress. I'm also looking forward to seeing Shane
> again at PyCon after meeting him so briefly all these years ago when I
> was still young and nimble. So I'm glad to hear he's going to make it!
> I'm also happy I'll get to see you again as well!
I'll be the one who arrives Monday afternoon without much hair on top. :-)
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -