[Zope-CMF] Re: Plone participation in the CMF list

[Rob Miller]

Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
> 
> On 2 Aug 2005, at 13:27, Florent Guillaume wrote:
> 
>> Tres Seaver  <tseaver at palladion.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think the discussion around Archetypes, in particular, ended up
>>> stalled over the question of whether to "code generation" design
>>> should be preferred over "configuration-based" design (as found in
>>> CPSSchemas, for instance).
>>>
>>
>> Also now that Zope 3 is taking more and more importance in CMF, any
>> schema-based solution should be based on Zope 3 schemas. IMO both
>> Archetypes and CPSSchemas are too big frameworks to include in CMF.
> 
> 
> Absolutely. I think at least at the CMF developer level we're in  
> agreement that the direction is "towards Zope 3 via Five". Any  decision 
> we make about including new code must be made with that in  mind.
> 
> Which leaves the question, because I simply don't know: What is the  
> direction Plone is moving in?

the plone developer community is far from monolithic, and i don't claim 
to speak for everyone, but i'd say the moving "towards Zope 3 via Five" 
is a fair description.  the most likely major initial effort here will 
probably be to reimplement the Archetypes template system, replacing the 
skins template mess that we have currently with an entirely views-based 
system.  sidnei has already started a "Fate" product that is likely to 
be the basis for this effort.

-r