On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 04:53:11PM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| >I am not 100% sure this is what you had in mind, but basically i've
| >broke down the 'publish' method from ZPublisher.Publish into the
| >methods of IPublication, and it seems to have mapped quite well with
| >some minor exceptions.
| Cool. It should.  IPublication was designed by insoecting all
| the odd hooks in Zope 2.

Yeah, the biggest difference seems to be exception handling from what
I can tell.

| >My only fear so far is that there might be some issues with the
| >request object itself being not 100% backwards compatible, but I think
| >we can have backwards compatibility implemented as an adapter from the
| >Zope 3 request to Zope 2 request.
| Possibly.  Note that the request itself is pluggable.  Zope 3 has a
| notion of request factories.  When you set up a particular server,
| you can specify which request factory is used.  It would be nice though
| of Zope 2 and Zope 3 requests could be handled by the same server
| (host/port).
| Adaptation may be a good way to start, although arranging for the
| adaptation to happen could get interesting.
| It might be better to see if we can come up with a request that provides
| both Z2 and Z3 request APIs, if possible and then start a process of
| deprecation of features we don't want in the future.  This might
| be easier and simpler than adaptation.

Sounds good to me. By quickly looking Zope 3's requests have mostly
the same methods and features from Zope2's. However sems like most
methods were renamed for consistency (eg: supports_retry ->

The greatest lacking functionality in Zope 3 seems to be the lack of a
'lazy' namespace, which is used primariliy for the 'SESSION' object in
Zope 2. How do people feel about adding that to Zope 3?

Sidnei da Silva
Enfold Systems, LLC.
Zope3-dev mailing list
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to