On 3/4/09 9:47 AM, Roger Ineichen wrote: > Hi Paul > >> Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project >> >> On 3/4/09 8:16 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote: > > [...] > >> Chameleon provided something that made it work for those >> users, while allowing it to not be burdened by those needs. >> Everybody wins. >> Hopefully such solutions will be the norm in the future. >> >>> That particular discussion is over, though, and I have no >> interest in >>> having it again. > > I hope not! I don't like to have any code in an application which > I don't use. > > But right now I don't see a better solution for the chicken > and egg problem we have with z3c.pt and chameleon support > in our base packages. In older days we used monkey patches > for that problem, but that's no solution anymore.
I agree, and I think this case is a good exemplar for the challenge. Chameleon wanted to make a good templating engine that was independent of megaframeworks. For that, it needed/wanted a configuration language that met your statement "I don't like to have any code...I don't use". But legacy in one of the projects changed this from a self-contained, 1x amount of work into a cobweb of bigger issues, control in the hands of others, and 10x the work. Human nature says that's demoralizing. Hopefully the Zope Framework proposal helps untangle this, and gets to a point where you don't have to keep the Uberthing in your head when doing something small. --Paul _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )