-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hanno Schlichting wrote:
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Chris McDonough <chrism@plope.com> wrote:
So it seems like a good idea to explicitly distinguish the set of packages that BFG uses from "the ZTK" by giving the bicycle repair toolkit a name and saying that the ZTK depends on that, if only to give another "target point" in a diagram that includes frameworks that don't use the entire ZTK. "ZCA" seems good enough to me, although I don't really care what it's called.
I think ZCA as in Zope Component Architecture defines quite well what BFG currently uses internally.
It could be interesting to see if we can come up with better definitions of what micro-frameworks the ZTK is composed of. What kind of bags of technologies do we have that offer some consistent and useful feature?
The ZCA seems to be one of those and the ZODB is another that has some identity to it.
The ZODB is explicitly not part of the ZTK, and is not subject to the oversight of the ZTG SG.
Possible other features could be:
schemas
zope.configuration ends up pulling in zope.schema. If you mean something bigger (like the form libraries) OK.
object publishing traversal / location
These two are intrinsically inseparable AFAIK.
security / authentication
I do know of one user who reports using zope.security without the bigger ZTK: I would have said it was impossible elsewise.
page templates / tal i18n
Mostly inseparable.
catalog / indexes
Only one package AFAIK.
web server (server, processlifetime)
caching (ramcache, cache descriptors) mail handling browser components (pages, resources, menus) pluggable browser components (contentproviders, viewlets) form components (formlib) persistent components (container, copy/paste, lifecycleevent)
I' afriad I've forgotten everything I [ever knew about most of these packages.
persistent relationships (intid, keyreference)
zope.intid is a depencency of zope.catalog. I don't think keyreferencs is.
This list isn't all inclusive and it's not really clear what package belongs to which of these grous. The relationship between these and their dependencies isn't all too clear either. But I think if we want to create documentation or some identity and community around things, it makes more sense to do so on this kind of higher level than trying to do that on the level of our current packages.
It's probably too early to do this yet and the community will focus first on getting BlueBream off to a great start and allow Grok to finish its move to the ZTK. This is just what Tres and Chris have been hinting at, when we talked about the term "framework" and what that really is :-)
I argued early on that there were actually multiple Zope Toolkits, so I am very much in favor of identifying coherent subsets, particularly if that makes it easier to identify the folks / communities of interest attached to them. Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAktY9HoACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ4T0gCgroEtgR9kuFzEx4nDCq6ESHa5 rTEAn1Tyj4mZIJIRkCFW8jKIJp+pWTzx =O7i0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----