[Grok-dev] Re: Grok in Zope 2: Paris Sprint first day wrap up: Success! (Kinda)

[Lennart Regebro]

On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 2:42 AM, Martijn Faassen <faassen at startifact.com> wrote:
>  I think 'five.grok' might be a good idea, if it aims to look similar to
> grok. Instead of 'import grok', you can then do 'from five import grok' and
> expect the same base classes in there (or perhaps a subset). So then you can
> do 'grok.View' as usual later, even though the ViewGrokker in question may
> have a different implementation. If it doesn't have a different
> implementation (such as grok.Adapter), it's just an import redirect away.

I agree. We went with five.grokkers, because we didn't want to call it
grok, but then when it came to importing we kinda changed our mind,
for th reasons you mention. I'll check with Godefroid, but we'll
probably rename it today.

-- 
Lennart Regebro: Zope and Plone consulting.
http://www.colliberty.com/
+33 661 58 14 64