Am Dienstag, 19. Dezember 2006 13:03 schrieb Christian Theune: > Hi, > > Florian Lindner wrote: > > That's something I had mentioned in my posting too. It has advantage that > > the feeds could decide if they want to be called or not, whereas by > > the "utility-way" they would always be called. > > Considering your hesitation towards the component architecture, here's > some more input:
I have no hesitations towards the component architecture. If I had I would not use Zope3. ;-) > Nowadays, registering a (persistent) object as a utility expresses > basically the same functionality. If it wants to be called, you can > register it as a utility for an interface (and maybe a name), if you > don't want to, you don't (or you unregister it). > > What you automatically get is: > > - you don't have to write your own registry code (again), > - the CA is optimized to do this kind of lookups Ok, these are two strong points. > > The distinction between software and content space was pretty much > removed now. Even content objects are software, or not? Ehh, got me... Ok, I'm convinced, I'll probably do it this way. Regards, Florian _______________________________________________ Zope3-users mailing list Zope3-users@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope3-users
