[Zope-PTK] Workflow - security model

[Chalu Kim]

In my previous message, I have mentioned two idea;

1. selective packing built into generic object model
2. selective ZODB mounting to create that subversioning
3. with this, a utility to extract sub-object into ZODB mountable file

Once, these things are in place. We can take it a step further to create
portable ZODB.

Building CVS into Zope to create sub-version does not sound nice. It
definitely throws something off.

Showing PTK and demo without proper workflow to clients for feedback has
been; that is nice but ....

What Jay expresses in his wants is what I hear. 

"Spicklemire, Jerry" wrote:
> 
> Jay said:
> 
> > We have plenty of tools for doing software process using CVS for doing
> code
> > reviews and merging etc. I can see no un-dodgy way to let code that
> resides
> > in the the ODB to participate in this. What is needed is a full file per
> > object based ODB implementation or something. This again runs into the
> same
> > problem of "What about bizzare pickled object data?". And how would you
> > match zope users to CVS users? And versions? How would changes in the file
> > system get back into Zope?
> 
> ZCVS Mixin may not resolve all these concerns, but the "file centric"
> view of CVS is accomodated, by exporting from a central (test) Zope, and
> then importing to a development (dev) Zope. The dev Zope could be a Zope
> installation on the developers desktop, or a local server accessible via
> LAN. Native ZODB objects are moved "through" CVS as files, which is how
> diffs, etc. are managed.
> 
> and:
> 
> > Its not transparent. Zope's idea of versioning and CVS need to be very
> > tightly linked. I like the idea of CVS being another ODB implementation
> (be
> > it a really slow and inefficient one
> 
>  http://www.zope.org/Members/sspickle/ZCVSMixin
> 
> The screen shots don't show everything you need to know to make the most of
> ZCVS Mixin, but they can give you some hints. No it's not transparent, but
> it is integrated by way of a Tab in the Zope Through the Web GUI. Rather
> than
> CVS being a separate ODB, CVS acts as an intermediary between the common
> ODB,
> and the developer's local ODB. The role of CVS is really much the same as in
> 
> conventional usage, providing the means to create snapshots, step through a
> revision history (independent of a "packed" central ZODB), etc.
> 
> > Because of this reason this doesn't really work for a content management
> > application. For content management the idea of workflow has to
> > configurable, have a customized gui and again be transparent to Zope.
> 
> Yes, ZCVS Mixin wasn't created to solve "content management" within a
> Workflow
> Paradigm. On the other hand, if your content providers are already using the
> 
> Zope TTW GUI, the ZCVS Tab is good at showing the state of revisions.
> 
> Content Management, as most folks imagine it, is more of an application than
> a
> system tool. A higher level interface with events and triggers could
> certainly
> be layered over ZCVS to provide services to content oriented users.
> 
> and Paul said:
> 
> > Looks like we need to make Zope a Subversion server, so we'll have to add
> > change sets and diffs. :^)
> 
> The SubVersion plan also sounds cool, but if you have to keep moving today,
> ZCVS Mixin can help with most of the thorniest details of Object Versioning.
> 
> Later,
> Jerry S.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Zope-PTK maillist  -  Zope-PTK@zope.org
> http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-ptk
> 
> See http://www.zope.org/Products/PTK/Tracker for bug reports and feature requests