On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 11:01:10AM -0500, Tres Seaver wrote:
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
| Hash: SHA1
| Sidnei da Silva wrote:
| > On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 03:00:28PM -0500, Tres Seaver wrote:
| > | I hope to get the "standard" plugins exportable / importable shortly, so
| > | that you will be able to "snapshot" your PAS configuration (e.g., to
| > | check it into CVS, or to migrate it to another machine). Such on-disk
| > | profiles should make installing a pre-configured PAS much easier: just
| > | tweak the PAS in a sandbox until it does what you want, then export it
| > | to disk, and register the exported directory as a GenericSetup profile.
| > | Most of what PlonePAS does currently would fall into this category,
| > | with the exception of the GRUF-migration code (I think).
| > Talking about PlonePAS, I would like to see at least the extra interfaces
| > defined in PlonePAS (mainly group management stuff) moved to PAS
| > before the 1.2 release. Would that be acceptable?
| I don't recall what they are, or whether the framework actually depends
| on them (as opposed to "aggregating" them for benefit of application
| code). In the latter case, there would be almost no reason not to move
| them in; if the framework itself actually changes to take advantage of
| the new interfaces, then we should probably look more closely, just to
| ensure that they allow for everyone's use cases.
The main motivation right now, for me, is that we have patches for
LDAPMultiPlugins to implement group functionality, and that would make
LDAPMultiPlugins depend on PlonePAS just for the interfaces.
Those interfaces, IMHO, really should live in PAS. Here's the patch,
| Note that PlonePAS would already be able to register them as part of the
| profile it uses to create the PAS, if all that is needed is to have them
| managed by the plugin registry; the plugins would just be instantiated
| from classes outside of the PAS product.
That sounds great.
Sidnei da Silva
Enfold Systems, LLC.
Zope-PAS mailing list