[Zope-dev] who wants to maintain Zope 3?

[Martijn Faassen]

Hey,

Roger Ineichen wrote:
>> * the thing with the ZMI - do you care about the ZMI?
> 
> Of corse do we all need the UI part for manage the components
> we install. But the old style ZMI views are obsolate this days.
> Right now we have to write this part for each project by ourself
> if they need to depend on z3c.form and z3c.pagelet.

I don't need the UI part myself for many applications. It'd be nice to 
have a common UI for managing utilities and such at some stage, but I 
see this as a project separate from Zope 3 . (it could be part of a Grok 
UI for instance in the case of Grok)

>> * the thing that can be installed as a particular development 
>> platform - do you care about the installation story for Zope 
>> 3? (as opposed to Grok or your own application's?)
> 
> Yes, I don't use it but I think we should have something 
> available as a starting point for newcomers.

> This could be something like zopeproject or a minimalistic
> setup with as less as possible zope.*, z3c.* and repoze packages.

Don't forget that an actual starting point for newcomers needs 
documentation, preferably on some web site. Grok and repoze.bfg do a 
decent job in that department.

I don't think there should be a starting point to start developing with 
the "Zope Toolkit" by itself. If people want another starting point 
that's more similar to traditional Zope 3 they should create one, but I 
don't think it should be called Zope 3. "zopeproject" is a rather 
ambiguous name as well...

 > I think we should take a look if we can build a minimal
 > setup which Plone, Grok and other projects can use. Do you think
 > there could be such a based configuration? Or is there to much
 > difference in each of Plone, Grok, repoze etc?

I think there is significant overlap between Plone and Grok (and 
traditional Zope 3 setups). I'd be happy to move Grok to a common 
directory layout. To my knowledge they're all using paster now. repoze 
I'm not sure about, as it doesn't use buildout as its standard way to 
install.

I think that at most the Zope Toolkit can support libraries and 
methodologies that help with installation, not the whole tool itself. 
Grok for instance will still need to maintain its own installation tool, 
but the tool could delegate some work to shared libraries.

[snip]
>> If nobody is interested, we should perhaps stop talking about 
>> it entirely. If people are just interested in the ZMI, 
>> perhaps we should form a ZMI project.
> 
> The question is, can we find browser page pattern which Grok,
> Plone, repoze and others can use? Everybody needs to have at
> least management views for manage the components they install
> in some ways. So the question is not if we skip the ZMI or not.
> I think the question is can we improve and share such
> views in the different projects or do we have to develop views
> for each of them?

I don't understand this question. You can already use Grok's views in 
Zope 3 projects, and in Zope 2 projects as well if you install 
five.grok, as far as I'm aware. bfg is quite different in its approach, 
so I'm not sure there.

But this seems to be another discussion altogether?

Regards,

Martijn