Mailing List Archive: Zope: Dev

Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

ct at gocept

Nov 16, 2011, 2:30 AM

Post #1 of 22 (554 views)
Permalink

Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

Hi,

I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.

As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.

From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices
upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple
orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to
leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework.

I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone.

Christian

--
Christian Theune · ct [at] gocept
gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

l at lrowe

Nov 16, 2011, 3:24 AM

Post #2 of 22 (549 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

On 16 November 2011 10:30, Christian Theune <ct [at] gocept> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.
>
> As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
> details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.
>
> From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices
> upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple
> orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to
> leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework.
>
> I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone.

It was removed in http://zope3.pov.lt/trac/changeset/122056 because it
wasn't actually being used anywhere. I'm not completely averse to
adding it back, but it does create confusion with the various
different alternatives in Zope2 like CMF skins and plone.browserlayer.

Laurence
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

ct at gocept

Nov 16, 2011, 3:30 AM

Post #3 of 22 (546 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

Hi,

On 11/16/2011 12:24 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
> On 16 November 2011 10:30, Christian Theune<ct [at] gocept> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.
>>
>> As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
>> details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.
>>
>> From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices
>> upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple
>> orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to
>> leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework.
>>
>> I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone.
>
> It was removed in http://zope3.pov.lt/trac/changeset/122056 because it
> wasn't actually being used anywhere. I'm not completely averse to
> adding it back, but it does create confusion with the various
> different alternatives in Zope2 like CMF skins and plone.browserlayer.

I think it was not used by Zope2 itself - however, it's a feature
provided by the framework that applications can use. I guess there might
be features in a framework that the framework itself doesn't make use of.

Going down into the new ZMI project I find it to be the most
light-weight approach without adding an extra dependency.

Christian

--
Christian Theune · ct [at] gocept
gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

ct at gocept

Nov 16, 2011, 3:30 AM

Post #4 of 22 (545 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

Hi,

On 11/16/2011 12:24 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
> On 16 November 2011 10:30, Christian Theune<ct [at] gocept> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.
>>
>> As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
>> details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.
>>
>> From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices
>> upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple
>> orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to
>> leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework.
>>
>> I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone.
>
> It was removed in http://zope3.pov.lt/trac/changeset/122056 because it
> wasn't actually being used anywhere. I'm not completely averse to
> adding it back, but it does create confusion with the various
> different alternatives in Zope2 like CMF skins and plone.browserlayer.

I think it was not used by Zope2 itself - however, it's a feature
provided by the framework that applications can use. I guess there might
be features in a framework that the framework itself doesn't make use of.

Going down into the new ZMI project I find it to be the most
light-weight approach without adding an extra dependency.

Christian

--
Christian Theune · ct [at] gocept
gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

optilude+lists at gmail

Nov 16, 2011, 3:31 AM

Post #5 of 22 (547 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

On 16 November 2011 11:30, Christian Theune <ct [at] gocept> wrote:

> Going down into the new ZMI project I find it to be the most
> light-weight approach without adding an extra dependency.

What is this project? ;-)

Martin
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

ct at gocept

Nov 16, 2011, 3:34 AM

Post #6 of 22 (552 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

On 11/16/2011 12:31 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> On 16 November 2011 11:30, Christian Theune<ct [at] gocept> wrote:
>
>> Going down into the new ZMI project I find it to be the most
>> light-weight approach without adding an extra dependency.
>
> What is this project? ;-)

We're currently sprinting in Berlin to explore a clean-up of the ZMI.
We're experimenting a bit with some ideas and I'll make a write-up of
what we found in the next days.

Technically we're investigating making a separate package that would
allow us to remove the old cruft DTML-ZMI and replace it with a small,
PT-based Zope4 application that runs in a separate skin.

Christian

--
Christian Theune · ct [at] gocept
gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

regebro at gmail

Nov 16, 2011, 3:49 AM

Post #7 of 22 (545 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:24, Laurence Rowe <l [at] lrowe> wrote:
> It was removed in http://zope3.pov.lt/trac/changeset/122056 because it
> wasn't actually being used anywhere. I'm not completely averse to
> adding it back, but it does create confusion with the various
> different alternatives in Zope2 like CMF skins and plone.browserlayer.

Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both
confuses the heck out of me.

//Lennart
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

charlie.clark at clark-consulting

Nov 16, 2011, 3:53 AM

Post #8 of 22 (552 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro <regebro [at] gmail>:

> Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both
> confuses the heck out of me.

Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I think
we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser layers,
well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think that CMF Skins
still offer some functionality that you don't get with browser layers out
of the box.

Charlie
--
Charlie Clark
Managing Director
Clark Consulting & Research
German Office
Kronenstr. 27a
DÃ¼sseldorf
D- 40217
Tel: +49-211-600-3657
Mobile: +49-178-782-6226
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

regebro at gmail

Nov 16, 2011, 4:28 AM

Post #9 of 22 (538 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
<charlie.clark [at] clark-consulting> wrote:
> Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro <regebro [at] gmail>:
>
>> Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both
>> confuses the heck out of me.
>
> Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I think
> we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser layers,
> well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think that CMF Skins
> still offer some functionality that you don't get with browser layers out
> of the box.

When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die.

//Lennart
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

tseaver at palladion

Nov 16, 2011, 5:06 AM

Post #10 of 22 (538 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/16/2011 07:28 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
> <charlie.clark [at] clark-consulting> wrote:
>> Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro
>> <regebro [at] gmail>:
>>
>>> Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having
>>> both confuses the heck out of me.
>>
>> Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I
>> think we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser
>> layers, well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think
>> that CMF Skins still offer some functionality that you don't get
>> with browser layers out of the box.
>
> When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die.

Note that for all their warts, they are *massively* more successful than
the Z3 reimplementation, which was overengineered (I helped with that,
I'm sure). In particular, the exceesive amount of ZCA majyk makes
complicaterd uses of the Z3 skins very fragile (easy to misconfigure,
hard to discover what you broke).

Tres.
- --
===================================================================
Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver [at] palladion
Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk7DtUkACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ6m1ACfefhRA+UQGJEuFs8DTl/ADj3b
IeUAoLcfBcOUTVAw9uLSYxRxdAMYV/An
=EJ4l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

ct at gocept

Nov 16, 2011, 6:15 AM

Post #11 of 22 (538 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

On 11/16/2011 02:06 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 11/16/2011 07:28 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
>> <charlie.clark [at] clark-consulting> wrote:
>>> Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro
>>> <regebro [at] gmail>:
>>>
>>>> Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having
>>>> both confuses the heck out of me.
>>>
>>> Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I
>>> think we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser
>>> layers, well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think
>>> that CMF Skins still offer some functionality that you don't get
>>> with browser layers out of the box.
>>
>> When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die.
>
> Note that for all their warts, they are *massively* more successful than
> the Z3 reimplementation, which was overengineered (I helped with that,
> I'm sure). In particular, the exceesive amount of ZCA majyk makes
> complicaterd uses of the Z3 skins very fragile (easy to misconfigure,
> hard to discover what you broke).

But they also have their merits. If I could make a wish, I'd like to see
a shared implementation that marries all the benefits. :)

Something I love a lot is the ++skin++ traverser for example. I also
like the idea of "tagging" the Request object with structured
information (an interface) to indicate specialisation.

I hate that I have to spell the layer in each ZCML statement.

Just my 0.02,
Christian

--
Christian Theune · ct [at] gocept
gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

ct at gocept

Nov 16, 2011, 6:15 AM

Post #12 of 22 (539 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

On 11/16/2011 02:06 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 11/16/2011 07:28 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
>> <charlie.clark [at] clark-consulting> wrote:
>>> Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro
>>> <regebro [at] gmail>:
>>>
>>>> Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having
>>>> both confuses the heck out of me.
>>>
>>> Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I
>>> think we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser
>>> layers, well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think
>>> that CMF Skins still offer some functionality that you don't get
>>> with browser layers out of the box.
>>
>> When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die.
>
> Note that for all their warts, they are *massively* more successful than
> the Z3 reimplementation, which was overengineered (I helped with that,
> I'm sure). In particular, the exceesive amount of ZCA majyk makes
> complicaterd uses of the Z3 skins very fragile (easy to misconfigure,
> hard to discover what you broke).

But they also have their merits. If I could make a wish, I'd like to see
a shared implementation that marries all the benefits. :)

Something I love a lot is the ++skin++ traverser for example. I also
like the idea of "tagging" the Request object with structured
information (an interface) to indicate specialisation.

I hate that I have to spell the layer in each ZCML statement.

Just my 0.02,
Christian

--
Christian Theune · ct [at] gocept
gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

charlie.clark at clark-consulting

Nov 16, 2011, 6:28 AM

Post #13 of 22 (537 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

Am 16.11.2011, 15:15 Uhr, schrieb Christian Theune <ct [at] gocept>:

> But they also have their merits. If I could make a wish, I'd like to see
> a shared implementation that marries all the benefits.

> Something I love a lot is the ++skin++ traverser for example. I also
> like the idea of "tagging" the Request object with structured
> information (an interface) to indicate specialisation.

> I hate that I have to spell the layer in each ZCML statement.

Smells like a "ZIP" to me. ;-)

Charlie
--
Charlie Clark
Managing Director
Clark Consulting & Research
German Office
Kronenstr. 27a
DÃ¼sseldorf
D- 40217
Tel: +49-211-600-3657
Mobile: +49-178-782-6226
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

l at lrowe

Nov 16, 2011, 7:12 AM

Post #14 of 22 (535 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

On 16 November 2011 12:28, Lennart Regebro <regebro [at] gmail> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
> <charlie.clark [at] clark-consulting> wrote:
>> Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro <regebro [at] gmail>:
>>
>>> Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both
>>> confuses the heck out of me.
>>
>> Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I think
>> we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser layers,
>> well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think that CMF Skins
>> still offer some functionality that you don't get with browser layers out
>> of the box.
>
> When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die.

While I think there is definitely scope for simplifying the mix of
competing skin concepts in the Zope/CMF/Plone space, we need to be
careful not to bite off more than we can chew. We still have a lot of
CMF skin scripts and templates in Plone that I don't want to become a
blocker for adopting Zope 4. This should be the first of several
releases that progressively rationalise our software stack, lets not
try and do it all at once.

Laurence
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

ct at gocept

Nov 16, 2011, 7:21 AM

Post #15 of 22 (536 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

On 11/16/2011 04:12 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
> On 16 November 2011 12:28, Lennart Regebro<regebro [at] gmail> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
>> <charlie.clark [at] clark-consulting> wrote:
>>> Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro<regebro [at] gmail>:
>>>
>>>> Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both
>>>> confuses the heck out of me.
>>>
>>> Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I think
>>> we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser layers,
>>> well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think that CMF Skins
>>> still offer some functionality that you don't get with browser layers out
>>> of the box.
>>
>> When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die.
>
> While I think there is definitely scope for simplifying the mix of
> competing skin concepts in the Zope/CMF/Plone space, we need to be
> careful not to bite off more than we can chew. We still have a lot of
> CMF skin scripts and templates in Plone that I don't want to become a
> blocker for adopting Zope 4. This should be the first of several
> releases that progressively rationalise our software stack, lets not
> try and do it all at once.

Ack.

--
Christian Theune · ct [at] gocept
gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

ct at gocept

Nov 16, 2011, 7:21 AM

Post #16 of 22 (544 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

On 11/16/2011 04:12 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
> On 16 November 2011 12:28, Lennart Regebro<regebro [at] gmail> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
>> <charlie.clark [at] clark-consulting> wrote:
>>> Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro<regebro [at] gmail>:
>>>
>>>> Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both
>>>> confuses the heck out of me.
>>>
>>> Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I think
>>> we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser layers,
>>> well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think that CMF Skins
>>> still offer some functionality that you don't get with browser layers out
>>> of the box.
>>
>> When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die.
>
> While I think there is definitely scope for simplifying the mix of
> competing skin concepts in the Zope/CMF/Plone space, we need to be
> careful not to bite off more than we can chew. We still have a lot of
> CMF skin scripts and templates in Plone that I don't want to become a
> blocker for adopting Zope 4. This should be the first of several
> releases that progressively rationalise our software stack, lets not
> try and do it all at once.

Ack.

--
Christian Theune · ct [at] gocept
gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

ct at gocept

Nov 16, 2011, 7:21 AM

Post #17 of 22 (536 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

On 11/16/2011 11:30 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.
>
> As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
> details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.
>
> From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices
> upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple
> orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to
> leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework.
>
> I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone.

I'm interpreting the thread overall as an OK to revive the ++skin++
traverser.

Thanks,
Christian

--
Christian Theune · ct [at] gocept
gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

ct at gocept

Nov 16, 2011, 7:21 AM

Post #18 of 22 (536 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

On 11/16/2011 11:30 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.
>
> As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
> details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.
>
> From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices
> upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple
> orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to
> leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework.
>
> I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone.

I'm interpreting the thread overall as an OK to revive the ++skin++
traverser.

Thanks,
Christian

--
Christian Theune · ct [at] gocept
gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

regebro at gmail

Nov 17, 2011, 2:35 AM

Post #19 of 22 (520 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 16:12, Laurence Rowe <l [at] lrowe> wrote:
> While I think there is definitely scope for simplifying the mix of
> competing skin concepts in the Zope/CMF/Plone space, we need to be
> careful not to bite off more than we can chew. We still have a lot of
> CMF skin scripts and templates in Plone that I don't want to become a
> blocker for adopting Zope 4. This should be the first of several
> releases that progressively rationalise our software stack, lets not
> try and do it all at once.

Absolutely. Getting rid of CMFSkins is a part of getting rid of CMF,
not a part of moving to Zope 4. Different issues.

But I do think that whatever skin concept Zope 4 has, should be one
that can also be used by Plone. Until we get rid of CMF we have to
have at least two skin concepts, and that's one to many. Having a
third one is no good.

If, as Tres say, ++skins++ is overworked and overcomplicated, could we
extend plone.browserlayers to have a traverser or something?

//Lennart
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

charlie.clark at clark-consulting

Nov 17, 2011, 2:52 AM

Post #20 of 22 (520 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

Hi Lennart,

I'm not sure if you're not mixing different issues here.

Am 17.11.2011, 11:35 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro <regebro [at] gmail>:

> Absolutely. Getting rid of CMFSkins is a part of getting rid of CMF,
> not a part of moving to Zope 4. Different issues.

I assume you are referring to removing Plone's dependencies on CMF. That
is not relevant to the discussion about Zope 4 / ZMI reimagined.

Charlie
--
Charlie Clark
Managing Director
Clark Consulting & Research
German Office
Kronenstr. 27a
DÃ¼sseldorf
D- 40217
Tel: +49-211-600-3657
Mobile: +49-178-782-6226
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

regebro at gmail

Nov 17, 2011, 5:23 AM

Post #21 of 22 (520 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:52, Charlie Clark
<charlie.clark [at] clark-consulting> wrote:
> Hi Lennart,
>
> I'm not sure if you're not mixing different issues here.
>
> Am 17.11.2011, 11:35 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro <regebro [at] gmail>:
>
>> Absolutely. Getting rid of CMFSkins is a part of getting rid of CMF,
>> not a part of moving to Zope 4. Different issues.
>
> I assume you are referring to removing Plone's dependencies on CMF. That
> is not relevant to the discussion about Zope 4 / ZMI reimagined.

Which is exactly what I said above.

//Lennart
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

sylvain at infrae

Nov 22, 2011, 2:03 AM

Post #22 of 22 (459 views)
Permalink

Re: Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4? [In reply to]

Op 16 nov 2011, om 11:30 heeft Christian Theune het volgende geschreven:

> Hi,
>

Hello,

> I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.
>
> As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
> details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.
>
> From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices
> upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple
> orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to
> leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework.
>
> I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone.
>

I like ++skin++, and used it. If it is gone it is not a big issue as it is not really difficult to rebuild.

There was an issue, due to the perfect implementation of shiftNameToApplication in HTTPRequest.py, it never really worked with the URL computation. However, you could force it in a VirtualHost rewrite rule.

Regards,

Sylvain,

--
Sylvain Viollon -- Infrae
t +31 10 243 7051 -- http://infrae.com
Hoevestraat 10 3033GC Rotterdam -- The Netherlands

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads