Hi there, Wichert Akkerman wrote: [snip] > For Plone we regret that we used persistent utilities to store > configuration: they have made Plone instances much more fragile > (removing a utiliy's implementation breaks the whole site) and forces > you to write a UI for the stored configuration again and again. To move > forwards we have come up with plone.registry (see > http://pypi.python.org/pypi/plone.registry), which gives you a nice > central storage system for configuration.
That's very interesting! I can see the benefits of separating this out, though on the other hand it does introduce more indirection, which is a cost as well. And the configuration UI itself could become simpler or at least less scattered around, so that's a win. I can see how this cost is worth it in large apps like Plone. I'm not sure about smaller apps, but could be a win too, as you could reuse the configuration UI. The costs can also be minimized with the use of a proxy (I saw you have one). It's definitely an interesting approach. I'll be keeping an eye on it... [it's licensed GPL at the moment the pypi page says. Is this going to change?] Regards, Martijn _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )