> Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] RFC: Site -> Locus
> Roger Ineichen wrote:
> > The site offers a SiteManagementFolder, SiteManagerContainer and a
> > LocalSiteManager.
> > The SiteManagementFolder by default installed as ['default'] is
> > absolutly useless and obsolate since the last refactoring.
> > It's just a container, earlier it was a kind of namespace.
> Yes, with Grok we've been installing directly in the
> SiteManagementContainer (which contains the folder, if I got
> my terminology right). We can't just get rid of this though,
> as it would break a lot of existing ZODBs.
> > Just refactoring zope.site and move the same packages
> arround because
> > of dependencies is in my point of view the wrong thing. We need to
> > define wich package will offer which parts of the hole site
> > otherwise it could be useless if at the end all packages get used
> > together in 99% of all Zope projects.
> Of course if we make such a separation each end needs to be
> useful for something.
> > What do you like to use independently from each other which is now
> > assembled as a unit in zope.site?
> One use case I have is that I want to be able to write tests
> that just deal with site management without pulling in a lot.
> I have done this with hacked up code now in both z3c.saconfig
> and hurry.custom.
I don't know this packages, but I agree, simpler testing setup
is a great use case
> The other use case I have is that I want to write packages
> that just need to be able to set the site or get the site and
> shouldn't need to care about, or depend on, zope.container at all.
Probably a rare use case or could become imporant if we use other
patterns then the container traversal pattern. Do you have some
ideas of using a contianer less traversal pattern?
> 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 -