Would it not be possible to have undo for the Zope portion of the object meaning what is stored in in the ZODB can be undone, what is stored in the fs is as it is. Like that we would have most of what undo offers for a normal element. Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy McKay" <amckay@merlintechnologies.com> To: "Leonardo Rochael Almeida" <leo@hiper.com.br> Cc: <zope-dev@zope.org> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 6:45 PM Subject: [Zope-dev] Re: Adding Batch Factory to ZMI "Add" menu OK?
My current project is a product called ZFS and I just got an initial beta working last night and since this project came up. Essentially im hoping this can be a replacement for LocalFS and all External* products. But this sounds very similar to your work...
ZFS is folderish object that points to a file system and hacks the storage level of Zope so that when an object is saved, part of it is "diverted" to the file system. Meaning the "textarea" part of a DTML Document is saved to the file system. Because it hacks the storage level, this object appears to be a normal object (so you can do all the usual things to, for example pasting it from ZFS to a normal folder means it becomes a normal object. This approach has many advantages and I hope to be able to allow all standard objects (DTML *, Python Scripts, Images, Files) to work in this manner.
If running in debug mode, it syncs automatically to the file system, meaning you can create and edit objects on the FS and they sync straight into Zope. If in production mode, you call it manually to update, thus getting much better performance.
You obviously lose some features (Undo) and there are still many issues to be fixed, but I need to get it done so expect a release soon.
On 27/05/02 18:38 -0300, Leonardo Rochael Almeida wrote: > Hello Craeg > > I particularly prefer the factory aproach. Zope users are already used > to that approach because of the Z Search Interface. I think you > shouldn't need a dummy class just to be able to create such a factory, > but right now I don't know how you'd go about creating a factory without > a class. > > As for an ExternalFileFolder, it would be useful if it automatically > created objects when they are added to the respective directory > (automatically as in, it checks for new objects when you look at the > object list (manage_main), or when you try to access a previously > inexistant (sp.) object. Although, because of Data.fs write-on-read > concerns, you might want this automation to be configurable on a folder > by folder basis). An ExternalFolder might also provide a view or tab to > configure default attributes of newly discovered objects. The objects > created this way would obviously be regular ExternalFile objects, and > you could copy/cut and paste them outside of the ExternalFileFolder > object. > > Cheers, Leo > > On Mon, 2002-05-27 at 17:32, Craeg K Strong wrote: > > Hello: > > > > I am about to release a new version of the ExternalFile and CVSFile products > > > > http://www.zope.org/Members/arielpartners/ExternalFile > > [...] > > -- > Ideas don't stay in some minds very long because they don't like > solitary confinement. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org > http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev > ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** > (Related lists - > http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce > http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
-- Andy McKay
_______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )