Tres Seaver wrote:
Evan Simpson wrote:
Seb Bacon wrote:
Could you provide a brief summary of why this is better than a
folder of python scripts? Perhaps a use case which illustrates the
problems of the current way of doing things?
It isn't *better* than a Folder of Scripts, it's *different* :-) I
Tres Seaver wrote:
Hmm, I'm thinking about this for the CMF. In CMF 1.3.x, a template
which has a cache manager, or a title, puts those values in a simple
'name=value'-formatted file, with extension '.properties'. Permission
mappings go in a separate file, with extension '.security'.
I wish I had
On Wed, 2003-09-10 at 23:46, Evan Simpson wrote:
> Tres Seaver wrote:
> > Actually, the restricted case is the one which has the real win; the
> > "free-floating" library is pretty, but not semanticaally needed. An
> > added argument: a ZPT with its own private library becomes, in effect,
> > a
--On Thursday, September 11, 2003 10:08:23 -0400 "Fred L. Drake, Jr."
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tres Seaver writes:
> Actually, the restricted case is the one which has the real win; the
> "free-floating" library is pretty, but not semanticaally needed. An
> added argument: a ZPT with it
Tres Seaver writes:
> Actually, the restricted case is the one which has the real win; the
> "free-floating" library is pretty, but not semanticaally needed. An
> added argument: a ZPT with its own private library becomes, in effect,
> a Zope3 view component; adopting such beasts will ease
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 09:50:51PM -0400, Tres Seaver wrote:
> For the filesystem representation: what if we just have two files for
> templates with libraries: 'foo.html' and 'foo.html.py'? Tools will
> like that better than either of the approaches which try to preserve the
> twins as a single
Evan Simpson wrote:
> Seb Bacon wrote:
> > Could you provide a brief summary of why this is better than a
> > folder of python scripts? Perhaps a use case which illustrates the
> > problems of the current way of doing things?
>
> It isn't *better* than a Folder of Scripts, it's *different* :-) I
Evan Simpson wrote at 2003-9-8 14:43 -0500:
> I'm thinking seriously about writing a Product to provide collections of
> Python functions defined by a single source text -- PythonLibraries.
+ 1
> ...
>The Python Libraries Product provides support for collections of
>restricted Pyth
I'm thinking seriously about writing a Product to provide collections of
Python functions defined by a single source text -- PythonLibraries.
This would *not* be the same as Zope 3's persistent modules, although it
would provide some of the same benefits.
Here's the README.txt:
Python Librarie
