Andy Dawkins wrote:
>
> So my question is this:
> What are peoples opinions on storing shared product data? Where should it
> be placed? Should this ability be added to Zope as a standard?
>
So, this would be the zope equivalent of the unix "/etc/" directory?
Perhaps you could have "etc (Pro
You should look into using ZCatalog for this purpose.
-josh zeidner
>I have an interesting issue which I don't think has been raised. But
>instead of solving the issue myself I thought I would share it with you
>guys/gals and see what you think.
>
>I am currently working on a Zope MailIn pr
>You should look into using ZCatalog for this purpose.
OK - that is a solution that could solve my particular issue, but where
would you put it? Would you put it in the Product folder, or in some common
place in the ZODB.
How would you create it originally? In the products __init__.py or by some
Dan wrote:
>Shared data should go in zope/var, or a subdirectory of that.
>Zope/lib should be considered read-only by running products unless
>explicitly changed by the user. As you have correctly pointed out,
>lots of machines share Zope installations for multiple servers.
>
>A standard interfac
, June 30, 2000 07:02
> To: Josh Zeidner; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Zope-dev] Product Data Storage
>
>
> >You should look into using ZCatalog for this purpose.
>
> OK - that is a solution that could solve my particular issue, but where
> would you put it? Would you p
Loren Stafford wrote:
> In that case we decided to put the Schedule in the root folder. There is no
> more global data than the catalog itself, but if there were it could be
> stored in the catalog folder, since catalogs are folderish.
Hmm, this is messy. Could the Catalog not be stored in your c
I haven't thought much about this; I just followed mj's original design.
Maybe there was some reason for this decision. Any comment Martijn?
-- Loren
>
> Loren Stafford wrote:
> > In that case we decided to put the Schedule in the root folder.
> There is no
> > more global data than the catalog
On Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 12:48:54PM -0700, Loren Stafford wrote:
> I haven't thought much about this; I just followed mj's original design.
> Maybe there was some reason for this decision. Any comment Martijn?
> > Loren Stafford wrote:
> > > In that case we decided to put the Schedule in the root
Just my $0.02 worth...
If you can at all avoid it, I think you should find a way to store it in
the ZODB.
Maybe a Configuration product that would allow you to create arbitrary
configuration information and still be able to access it without making
filesystem calls. Think about DC's Zope on
>If you can at all avoid it, I think you should find a way to store it in
>the ZODB.
Ultimatley thats what I am aiming for
>Maybe a Configuration product that would allow you to create arbitrary
>configuration information and still be able to access it without making
>filesystem calls. Think abo
10 matches
Mail list logo
