[Zope-dev] Proposal: Align Zope 2 and Zope 3 permissions

[Martin Aspeli]

Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> Martin Aspeli wrote:
> [snip]
>>   - In ZCML (or a grok.require() directive) use the Zope 3 name
> 
> Grok also has a grok.Permission you can subclass, and those subclasses 
> can also be passed to grok.require().

I know, but I kind of consider creating permissions by subclassing 
grok.Permission an anti-pattern. That is, I don't like the idea of using 
Python classes purely for declarative configuration. That's the kind of 
thing that ought to sit in a configuration file, IMHO, and ZCML works 
fine for that kind of thing. But I digress. ;)

>>   - In code, e.g. when doing a checkPermission() call, use the Zope 2 name
>>   - With GenericSetup's rolemap.xml, use the Zope 2 name
> 
> We haven't gotten around to making grok.Permission subclasses useful 
> here yet in Grok, but we should.
> 
> [various proposal]
>> Thoughts?
> 
> I'm +1 on this, though with the caveat that I'm quite far from Zope 2 
> right now so I don't have a full picture of the impact. But it looks 
> like a good way to move Zope 2 closer to the Zope Toolkit approach.

Like I said, I think fixing it at the low level AccessControl API would 
be more invasive than I'd first thought. I'm not sure it's a safe thing 
to attempt right now...

Martin

-- 
Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book