Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> 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
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -