Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2007-7-18 22:59 +0200:
>On 18 Jul 2007, at 21:13 , Dieter Maurer wrote:
> ...
>> I prefer the standard approach:
>>   I see a framework -- Zope
>>   and a large number of application components that plug themself
>>   into the common framework.
>>   The application, in fact a complete collection of mini-applications
>>   is configured via objects in the ZODB and can be extended TTW.
>Right. This is what Martijn Faassen aptly calls the "Zope 2000"  
>development model. And it's probably about the farthest away from  
>working together with other Python web frameworks

I agree with this.

>and toning down  
>Zope for an easier entry.

But, Zope is quite easy on entry.

I expect that the traditional "Zope-the-application" was easier
to install and to build applications with than your new approach
which requires:

  *  paste

  *  WSGI

  *  zopeproject

  *  the application package

  *  one instance per application

True, experts can combine different Python web frameworks -- but what
part of the Zope audience will need this?

True, Python experts can be more economic with their knowledge.
But, it appears the things become more difficult for non-experts.

Zope3-dev mailing list

Reply via email to