Roger Ineichen wrote:
> Hi garz, Stephan, Paul
>> Betreff: Re: AW: [Zope3-Users] subform support for z3c.form
>> ok, i created a new repository now, because i'm not able to
>> create a new branch at svn.zope.org respective im too dumb,
>> even after i read all those svn related documents. :D i dont
>> think that i have write access there, as far as i understood that.
>> here is the repository with semi-public access:
>> login: ...
>> pw: ...
> I check it out and I need to take some serious time to
> review and think about it. The good thing is that I need
> a subform concept for one of my projects. I'll compare
> it with the existing implementation early next week
> and give you some feedback.
> Do you think this should be a own package e.g.
> z3c.subform or should we integrate it in
> z3c.form. As far as I can see we should integrate
> this in z3c.form. I'll take a look at that and
> talk to srichter about the additional subFields etc.
> arguments in the SubFormMixin class. Probably we
> can find a way to integrate your implementation.
> I think you should get commiter access to the zope repos.
> Your understanding of the z3c.form internals looks
> very good. Can you contact Jim Fulton (jim*zope.com) and
> ask for access and send him the contributer agreement?
> Take a look at this page for more info:
> Roger Ineichen
> Zope3-users mailing list
The subform-package can be integrated into z3c.form. Let me explain the
steps and discuss the most critical issue. It will depend on taste, if and
how this package should be integrated into z3c.form.
A plan for integrating would look like this:
1.) First the interfaces would have to be added.
2.) Expand the z3c.form.form-forms but leave the pagelet-pattern, as it is
implemented in the z3c.subform.form-forms, out. There wont be any
backwards-compatibility issues, since z3c.subform only adds the
"subFields"-Attribute and if that is keept empty, there wont be a
"subForms"-Attribute neither and everything stays the same.
3.) Merge the subform-modules of both packages.
4.) Add the Pagelet-enhanced z3c.subform.form-forms to
Discussion @point 4:
I think this is a very important thing to do. These forms allow users to
create standalone- and subform-forms with only one definition. Otherwise
user will have to create separate forms. But the problem in integrating
these forms into z3c.form is, that the concept of that package becomes
dirty, because those forms are based on the pagelet-pattern that isnt a part
But from a users standpoint of view, it will be very difficult to understand
how to use the subform-support efficiently, if the way of using it
efficiently isnt build in. And since there is no explanation for all of
this, it will be a challange to adopt for the user. I only need to remember
the experience that i had when learning all those z3c.form-related stuff
(pagelet, formui, template).
So there are 4 possibilites that i can see:
a.) Do a standalone subform-package and have it all included in one place.
b.) Do a complete integration with pagelet-patterned forms in z3c.form and
have it on one place too, but having two variations of the same form-classes
in one package, which might be confusing too.
c.) Do a partial integration in z3c.form package without the
pagelet-patterned forms and create a z3c.subform-package that holds those
forms separatly. Create pagelet-free subform-forms and include them in
z3c.subform-module. Problem here is the already existing EditSubForm,
regarding the already taken
name that can be overtaken since backwards-compatibility should be an issue
here (but maybe not, didnt thought about that).
d.) Relaunch z3c.form and include pagelet-package, template-package,
formui-package and subform-package, or just the last one.
It depends on the goals, one wants to follow, that decide which possibility
is the best.
regards gards ;)
View this message in context:
Sent from the Zope3 - users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Zope3-users mailing list