On 6 Feb 2007, at 09:59 , Chris Withers wrote:
Why named? If only so you can register many of them, then I call
yagni. Like a unix file system, a zope instance should only have
one root :-)
Sure. But the use of named utilities would make it a tad easier
because you wouldn't need ZCML overrides.
Let's say Zope 3 defines an IRootObjectFactory utility called
'zope.app.appsetup'. So, a default zope.conf would look like this:
# root-object-factory -- name of an IRootObjectFactory utility
that the
# publication will use to create the root object.
#
# Default: root-object-factory zope.app.appsetup
Why would this be in zope.conf at all?
I would have thought just having a normal zcml setup for a single,
global IRootObjectFactory utility would be fine...
Well, actually, you can't register it through ZCML because ZCML knows
nothing about the ZODB. zope.app.appsetup would have to instantiate
and register such a utility if it finds a ZODB section in zope.conf,
because the utility will have to know about the database.
The point is that this is really hard to override. Overrides only
work within the execution of a single ZCML tree. That's why I
suggested named utilities.
Also, why the factory? Why not just IRootObject?
I guess just IRootObject is ok, the factory would have been a bit
more generic because then you're not registering a specific root
object for all times but could actually incorporate some logic into
the root-object-finding-process.
_______________________________________________
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
