Martin Aspeli wrote:
No, I heard you the first time. But whilst zope.conf has been around for ages,
it has not been used for the purpose that ZCML is now used.

Really? I thought ZCML was used for configuration of a web application/server. .conf has been used exactly that with Apache for a long long time, and for Zope, just a "long" time ;-)

The kind of thing
people do with ZCML are an order of magnitude more complex than the things
people do in zope.conf.

Really? Ever written Apache rewrite rules?

What is true is that there are now two books in print and a growing body of
documentation that explains ZCML. If you're suggesting that Zope deprecates ZCML
and starts using ZConfig for component wiring, you're going to turn that
documentation from useful to confusing,

We're talking about some pretty minimal differences...


    names="title body"


  title       Posting
  class       .posting.Posting
  permission  zope.ManageContent
  view        AddPosting.html

  permission  zope.ManageContent
  name        title
  name        body

and you're going to alienate a few more
developers (and honestly, Zope 3 doesn't yet have that many to alienate).

This hasn't stopped big changes in Zope 3 so far, and I kinda like that...

to find out if they want to bet on it for their next big development project, it
doesn't exactly inspire confidence, does it? And for what reason? Because you
don't personally like the aesthetics of XML?

Actually, because I want to lower barriers to entry. Apache is the most prevelant web server on the planet. It uses .conf format. Zope also uses .conf format, and has done for years. Zope 3 then introduced ZCML, which no other web server on the planet uses ;-)

So no, this is NOT just about the aesthetics of XML...



Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
Zope3-dev mailing list

Reply via email to