Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 06:30:02AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| Sidnei da Silva wrote:
| >On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 05:28:14PM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| >| >There are a bunch of issues to be resolved, like the fact that it's
| >| >not possible to access the initial ZConfig options object because it's
| >| >thrown away, so, in order of priority:
| >| >
| >| >1. It's not possible to find where the <INSTANCE_HOME> is.
| >|
| >| Why is this necessary?
| >
| >So the config file for paste.deploy can be in <INSTANCE_HOME>/etc/paste.ini
|
| Hm. I don't have the time to think hard about this right now,
| but I suspect the model you are following isn't quite right. Rather than
| implicitly looking for a paste file in a magic location, I suspect that you
| should name the paste file in your ZConfig file or possibly extend the
| ZConfig
| schema with components that reproduce what's normally found in a paste
| config
| file (app definitions, server definitions, etc.). Of course, either of
| these
| options requires updating the ZConfig schema which is a real pain, so I can
| understand why you wouldn't want to do that.
And you're right to the point.
My original intention was to put the config file location in the
ZConfig schema, but that's *waaaay* too painful right now.
OTOH, it does seem to work pretty reasonably right now to serve as a
prototype.
Sure.
> I have other concerns than if the config file location is
magic or not at the moment. I mean, it's probably better that it's
hardcoded to '<INSTANCE>/etc/paste.ini' than configurable at this
point.
Sure, for a prototype.
In the long term, explicit is better than implicit.
> I don't think one would need *more than one* paste.deploy
configuration file anyway, so changing it's name would be pretty
pointless.
I don't agree. Paste Deploy encourages use of multiple configution files:
- to reuse configuration
- to override configuration
I think we can slowly progress from here, solving the ZConfig problem,
then the server-type-always-takes-db-argument and eventually end up
with zope.paste in the main tree and having the default wsgi server be
configured using paste.deploy.
Maybe, but I don't want to simply pile hack on cruft on hack.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714 http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org
_______________________________________________
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
