Shane Hathaway wrote:
FWIW, I still hate ZCML for the following reasons:
Everyone seems to agree on the direction suggested here:
http://www.z3lab.org/sections/blogs/philipp-weitershausen/2005_12_14_zcml-needs-to-do-less
Indeed, while I strongly agree with all of this, I think it's orthagon
Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 23. Januar 2006 15:22:27 -0500 Andrew Sawyers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 18:51 +0100, Andreas Jung wrote:
This separation is artificial. I've never seen a single Zope
installation where a system administrator had to care about Zope
configura
Andrew Sawyers wrote:
1.
On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 18:29 +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
[snip]
And the intended audience of ZCML is a very different audience -
developers versus sysadmins.
I'd have to say, I belived quite the opposite. There are specific
references to Admins being part of t
Fred Drake wrote:
On 1/21/06, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
are really attributes of foo. In ZCML, this might have been:
Except this breaks down in the case of ZConfig elements,
which allow configuration like this:
x = 1
x = 2
y = 3
Yes, but both ZCML and T
Jim Fulton wrote:
Maybe. My thought that this might be handled by
cheating in the sax events. (Or maybe we shouldn't
exactly do sax events.) In the event that says "here's
a tag named 'foo'", we'd provide a list for the value of
x. Or we could do separate events for each option.
I think we def
Fred Drake wrote:
On 1/23/06, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As I said earlier, I think XML is wrong for configuration for exactly
this kind of reason... element-based is right for this type of config,
it's why Apache uses, it's why Zope 2 uses it, and it's why Zope 3 uses
it for the
Martin Aspeli wrote:
No, I heard you the first time. But whilst zope.conf has been around for ages,
it has not been used for the purpose that ZCML is now used.
Really? I thought ZCML was used for configuration of a web
application/server. .conf has been used exactly that with Apache for a
lon
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Except ZConfig on/off switches are very easy to understand just by reading the
zope.conf file. That doesn't mean that same syntax would make managing
something
as complex as the type of wiring ZCML is currently used for any clearer,
though.
No, but that's the realm of Ph
Max M wrote:
Personally I abhor these configuration languages.
I can never figure out what all the options are, and I allways suspect
that I am missing something clever in some undocumented cornercase
somewhere.
Well, ZCML is already self documenting, as far as I can see.
Zope.conf would als
On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 10:13:33AM +, Chris Withers wrote:
| Zope 3 then introduced ZCML, which
| no other web server on the planet uses ;-)
I think you are mistaken. If ZCML is a variant of XML, then Zope 3 is
not alone. I've been told that IIS 7 does use XML for it's
configuration.
--
Sid
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Sure, but it's not my point. I don't think sysadmins, familiar with
Apache configuration syntax, are the audience for ZCML. Developers are.
Therefore, an important benefit of ZConfig syntax, familiarity from
Apache, goes away in case of ZCML.
Well, I can only speak for
Stephan Richter wrote:
I'll note that I commonly make browser the default namespace in browser
packages.
And _I'll_ note that it's one of the things in your book that threw
me... I had to do a double take to figure out where all these "new"
directives had come from when I eventually noticed
Gary Poster wrote:
FWIW, me too. I'm no XML guru (as Fred will attest ;-) ) but reading
the namespaces on an XML file seems like basic XML procedure.
Well, the reading of them is the lesser of my two complaints...
I find it irksome to have to type them at the top of ever file. Is there
no
On 1/24/06, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I find it irksome to have to type them at the top of ever file. Is there
> no way that they could be pre-bound in the XML parser? That way you'd
> only need to inlcude them if you wanted to rebind them...
Even if we could avoid it at a technic
Fred Drake wrote:
Even if we could avoid it at a technical level, it means that what
we're reading is no longer XML. One of the desires with ZCML was to
not invent everything from scratch. So, *if* we're using XML, we need
to use it as defined, otherwise it *isn't* XML.
Yay.. bow down and w
Fred Drake wrote:
>>I find it irksome to have to type them at the top of ever file. Is there
>>no way that they could be pre-bound in the XML parser? That way you'd
>>only need to inlcude them if you wanted to rebind them...
>
> Even if we could avoid it at a technical level, it means that what
>
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
However, I think one namespace for ZCML is enough.
+1
Shane
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
However, I think one namespace for ZCML is enough.
+1
+1 ;-)
(and if we can get it down to one, we don't have to specify it at the
top of the file... yay!)
cheers,
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
> Shane Hathaway wrote:
>> Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
>>
>>> However, I think one namespace for ZCML is enough.
>>
>> +1
Big +1 to all of Philipp's suggestions.
I have a fair amount of experience with Zope2 and am learning Zope3...but
with half an eye at Ruby on Rails and Spring/Hibernate.
On 1/24/06, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Shane Hathaway wrote:
> > Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> >
> >> However, I think one namespace for ZCML is enough.
Are you sure?
Perhaps it's reasonable to use a single namespace for all the ZCML
directives defined as part of the Zope 3 r
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I like generating documentation directly from source.
> Namespaces provide a nice way to do that with XML files via XSLT, while
> still enabling RelaxNG schema validation, etc.
>
> foo
>
>The foo directive indicates that the bar setting should be wombat.
>
On Tuesday 24 January 2006 11:29, Fred Drake wrote:
> > >> However, I think one namespace for ZCML is enough.
>
> Are you sure?
>
> Perhaps it's reasonable to use a single namespace for all the ZCML
> directives defined as part of the Zope 3 release. What about
> third-party directives? Are you s
Fred Drake wrote:
On 1/24/06, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
However, I think one namespace for ZCML is enough.
Are you sure?
Perhaps it's reasonable to use a single namespace for all the ZCML
directives defined as part o
It would seem that the current default mechanism is poorly
suited to providing default values for non-immutables.
For example:
class IBar( Interface ):
a =
Object( schema = IFoo,
default = Foo() )
But if a “Foo” is not
immutable this doesn’t make sense. (In my case, I wan
That's a fair question.
This is a pattern I have learned by using Docbook 5.0, which is another
one of those
_lets_rewrite_an_established_technology_to_address_longstanding_issues_
releases.
Norm uses the RelaxNG annotations namespace[1].
I like the design principle RelaxNG uses for namespaces:
Shaun Cutts wrote:
It would seem that the current default mechanism is poorly suited to
providing default values for non-immutables. For example:
"Mutable" is a better way to say "non-immutable". :-)
class IBar( Interface ):
a = Object( schema = IFoo, default = Foo() )
But if a “Foo” is
On Jan 24, 2006, at 12:22 PM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Fred Drake wrote:
On 1/24/06, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
However, I think one namespace for ZCML is enough.
Are you sure?
Perhaps it's reasonable to use a single names
Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Fred Drake wrote:
>
>> On 1/24/06, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Shane Hathaway wrote:
>>>
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> However, I think one namespace for ZCML is enough.
>>
>>
>>
>> Are you sure?
>>
>> Perhaps it's reasonable to u
On 1/24/06, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gary Poster wrote:
> >
> > FWIW, me too. I'm no XML guru (as Fred will attest ;-) ) but reading
> > the namespaces on an XML file seems like basic XML procedure.
>
> Well, the reading of them is the lesser of my two complaints...
>
> I find it
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:10:29 -0800, Jeff Shell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
It's like those damned imports in Python. Why can't everything just be
available in one big honkin' namespace automatically?
I believe you mis-spelled "acquisition".
*ducks* ;)
--
Alexander Limi wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:10:29 -0800, Jeff Shell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
It's like those damned imports in Python. Why can't everything just be
available in one big honkin' namespace automatically?
I believe you mis-spelled "acquisition".
Acquisition is extensibili
Shane,
I considered 'default_factory' myself It seems good, but it
complicates the logic internally. For one thing, logically, we'd have to
also have 'missing_value_default' (unless we decree that missing values
have to be not-non-immutable, ah... immutable).
A further thought on where to put
Hello,
I'm currently writing a test in a README.txt and I want to make sure that
returned object a is of type zope.app.x. How can I test that?
Thanks,
Florian
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zop
Fred Drake wrote:
Are you sure?
Perhaps it's reasonable to use a single namespace for all the ZCML
directives defined as part of the Zope 3 release. What about
third-party directives? Are you saying we don't need to worry about
introducing names that conflict with third-party names we don't k
Jim Fulton wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Shane Hathaway wrote:
>
>> Jim Fulton wrote:
>>
>>> See:
>>>
>>> http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ZConfigAndOtherFormatsForZCML
>>>
>>> Comments and volunteers welcome.
>>
>>
>>
>> I like this proposal. It is likely to reduce the total amount of code.
>>
>>
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 10:16:13 -, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Commercial development tools typically have pretty decent XML support,
and if
you were to write e.g. a ZCML editor as an Eclipse plug in, being able
to rely
on existing XML components would be much easier. Develope
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2006-1-23 18:27 +0100:
> ...
>For one, ZConfig is a
>syntax not very well known, even granting its similarity to the Apache
>configuration language, while XML is very well known.
Come on:
The only "syntactic" part of "ZConfig" is: there are
keys with values and sect
Fred Drake wrote at 2006-1-23 09:56 -0500:
>On 1/23/06, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> As I said earlier, I think XML is wrong for configuration for exactly
>> this kind of reason... element-based is right for this type of config,
>> it's why Apache uses, it's why Zope 2 uses it, and i
Christian Lück wrote:
From a lerners point of view (for example me) the thematic organization
is a pro too: The z3 beginner will probably need the 'zope' and
'browser' namespaces at first. Browsing apidoc zcml namespaces lets your
knowledge grow fast, because you get structured information.
Ho
Am Dienstag, 24. Januar 2006 21:07 schrieb Florian Lindner:
> Hello,
> I'm currently writing a test in a README.txt and I want to make sure that
> returned object a is of type zope.app.x. How can I test that?
I've tried:
Failed example:
homeFolder #doctest: +ELLIPSIS
Expected:
Got nothin
Hello,
I'm refactoring a application developed for Zope 3.0, and in the
proccess of doing that, one of the things I wanted to do is to remove
some hardcoded xslt pipeline and instead use a WSGI 'middleware' or
'filter'.
So.. I was planning to use paste.deploy to put this together. However
it seem
[Florian Lindner]
> I've tried:
>
> Failed example:
> homeFolder #doctest: +ELLIPSIS
> Expected:
>
> Got nothing
>
>
> I've also tried it without the #doctest
>
> Why do I get just nothing?
That's expected if (and only if) `homeFolder` is bound to `None`.
What happens if you change t
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
Hello,
I'm refactoring a application developed for Zope 3.0, and in the
proccess of doing that, one of the things I wanted to do is to remove
some hardcoded xslt pipeline and instead use a WSGI 'middleware' or
'filter'.
Cool
So.. I was planning to use paste.deploy to p
Am Dienstag, 24. Januar 2006 22:57 schrieb Tim Peters:
> [Florian Lindner]
>
> > I've tried:
> >
> > Failed example:
> > homeFolder #doctest: +ELLIPSIS
> > Expected:
> >
> > Got nothing
> >
> >
> > I've also tried it without the #doctest
> >
> > Why do I get just nothing?
>
> That's ex
Chris Withers wrote:
Gary Poster wrote:
FWIW, me too. I'm no XML guru (as Fred will attest ;-) ) but reading
the namespaces on an XML file seems like basic XML procedure.
Well, the reading of them is the lesser of my two complaints...
I find it irksome to have to type them at the top of ev
Dieter Maurer wrote:
What I like with "ZConfig" is its schemas and especially the
ability to define datatypes.
I hope that similar things can be achieved with ZCML.
Of course it can, ZCML is defined in terms of Zope 3 schemas.
Florent
--
Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) Director of
Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Christian Lück wrote:
>
From a lerners point of view (for example me) the thematic organization
>>
>> is a pro too: The z3 beginner will probably need the 'zope' and
>> 'browser' namespaces at first. Browsing apidoc zcml namespaces lets your
>> knowledge grow fast, bec
Chris Withers wrote:
> (and if we can get it down to one, we don't have to specify it at the
> top of the file... yay!)
Not really. Specifying no namespace at all is not the same as specifying the
namespace of prefix-less elements. Even with one namespace the declaration of
that namespace is still
Stephan, may be it is possible to publish your book again in Wiki
format, and grant rights to other authors?
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Monday 23 January 2006 10:22, Guido Hoffmeier wrote:
>> I am new at Zope and at the moment I am struggling with the tutorial of
>> the Zope 3 Book (Online Versio
49 matches
Mail list logo
