On 12/2/10 12:18 AM, Cristopher Ewing wrote: > > On Dec 1, 2010, at 3:48 PM, Alex Clark wrote: > >> >> I'm afraid I'm already confused :-). Is templer.core the zopeskel >> package renamed? >> > > > I wish it were a bit less confusing, but let me try to explain. > > zopeskel as it currently exists will eventually be replaced by an empty egg > which simply depends on all the various templer.whatever packages I am > working on creating now. That way, folks will still be able to 'easy_install > zopeskel' and get exactly what they get now.
Ah, cool, that makes sense. > > However, because we are breaking the big zopeskel up into smaller templer > pieces, someone could also easy_install templer.plone_core and get only the > templates that help them to create plone namespace and plone.app namespace > packages, or easy_install templer.plone_addons and get theme and add-on > package templates, or perhaps easy_install templer.plone and get all of the > plone-related templates. Nice. > > We can even start creating templates for other systems, so perhaps there > might eventually be templates for pylons, django, grok, or whatever else is > out there. The core package really only includes the basics for a very > simple namespace and nested namespace packages. I'm even considering > removing the zc.buildout recipe template that is currently there and putting > it into a separate buildout base package so we can start templating buildouts > for all sorts of systems. I'm constantly throwing together quick buildouts > for development work I'm doing in django. I want a django buildout template > :) Right, +1. (FWIW, a Django buildout is easy: [buildout] parts = django [django] recipe = djangorecipe version = trunk #version = 1.2.3 #version = 1.2 #version = 1.1 #version = 1.0 Works good enough.) > > Anyway, I hope this helps make clear what is going on here. Read the > manifesto on splitting zopeskel in the trunk of the zopeskel code. Joel > Burton does a fantastic job of laying out the aims and rationale behind these > moves. I'm just the guy to whom the job fell. Yes! Thanks for the refresher. > > Thanks for asking, and for taking a look. No problem, I see what you mean now. We should use the branch you have that contains a "dummy" zopeskel to pull in the templer.core stuff. This is pretty exciting IMO, we could theoretically PLIP templer.plone to be included in the Plone core at some point… Alex > > c > > > ******************************** > Cris Ewing > Webmaster, Lead Developer > Department of Radiology Web Services > University of Washington > School of Medicine > Work Phone: (206) 616-1288 > Cell Phone: (206) 708-9083 > E-mail: cew...@u.washington.edu > Web: http://www.rad.washington.edu > ******************************* > -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net Author · http://aclark.net/admin _______________________________________________ ZopeSkel mailing list ZopeSkel@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/zopeskel