> Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] who wants to maintain Zope 3?
> Jim Fulton wrote:
> > I don't think these "bits" are cleanly separated. For
> example, if a
> > content component has some views, are those ZMI bits?
> Yes. zope.container doesn't define views. zope.app.container
> did (and does). "browser" directories are generally not part
> of the Zope Toolkit, though there are some exceptions
> (zope.app.publisher.browser, zope.app.form.browser).
> > Can you identify projects that are in or out of the toolkit? What
> > about zope.publisher? zope.security? zope.app.publication?
> Currently all three are in.
> zope.publisher + zope.app.publication might not remain in
> permanently if a better way of doing things evolves, but
> that's up in the air right now.
> > I agree with the idea of simply supporting a library of
> > I'm uncomfortable with the idea of saying you're going to
> "shrink the
> > codebase" without saying what's going.
> The ZMI is the bit that is going right now. Since we're
> factoring non-ZMI bits out of zope.app.*, eventually that'll
> mean a whole range of
> zope.app.* packages will not be maintained by the Zope
> Toolkit developers. The other bits are up for discussion.
> We don't intend to stop people from maintaining other
> packages outside the toolkit.
> > I don't want to see a separate
> > "Zope 3 " project distinct from the "Zope Toolkit".
> > I do want to see
> > the components we're using live within a project. If the "Zope
> > Toolkit" doesn't include components in common use, then I
> don't think
> > it has a lot of value.
> I'm not in the business of maintaining Zope 3 myself; I
> mainly care about how Grok uses it, and how I can integrate
> libraries in the ecosystem into my apps.
> The Zope Toolkit includes components in common use by Grok,
> Zope 2, and Zope 3.
> The Zope 3 project always attempted to be far more than just
> being a bunch of libraries. It attempted to be a system you
> can install and find documentation for and start developing
> with. When you install it, you see a user interface. It had a
> group of people who cared about it that you could talk to.
> There are a lot of concepts associated with Zope 3.
> What I'm trying to do is to separate these concepts, which is
> why we're going through some confusion.
> The Zope Toolkit is something that doesn't have an
> installation story for the whole. It does have some
> documentation about the whole: how it is developed primarily.
> But instead of having documentation for the whole ("Build
> your app with the Zope Toolkit, here's how to get started!"
> is not going to be there), it will focus on documentation
> about how to use the individual libraries. It leaves how to
> use it as an integrated whole to other projects. The Zope
> Toolkit has implementations of content objects such as the
> container. It doesn't have a user interface; it just has a
> way to construct user interfaces.
> The Zope Toolkit is there to serve the people who use it.
> That's people who use a large range of these libraries, or
> just some of them, and projects that build on top of these libraries.
> The question at hand is whether people care about a project
> that presents itself as a "whole", uses a lot of the Zope
> Toolkit, and has an installation story (and possibly a user
> interface), and that isn't Grok or Zope 2, but like Zope 3.
> If so, we could have a Zope 3 project that cares about those
> things (naming discussion aside).
Yes, absolutly. I will help to support such a Zope Toolkit
management app which will allow to get rid of the zmi part.
> Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
> ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists -
> http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -