[Zope-dev] direction

[Hanno Schlichting]

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Leonardo Rochael Almeida
<leorochael at gmail.com> wrote:
> As for the rest, most of the things that have been removed from core
> were done in such a way that they can still be used with Zope2, so
> ERP5 can happily keep using them. If things can keep evolving with
> this care we should be ok.

I tried to be careful to make things optional in the past. But we have
reached the end of where that is possible in many ways. Yes, we can
still make the session/browser id machinery optional, as these are in
separate packages and the application setup code no longer depends on
them. But almost everything else is all tightly integrated and part of
the App, OFS and Zope2 packages. There's some code we can move out of
these, like App.Extensions can go into ExternalMethods and ZSQLMethods
- but there's not much else left that's actually independent.

>> - Once most of the ZMI is gone, it should be feasible to drop DTML or
>> rewrite what little is left as page templates
>
> If DTML is still available as an optional product/package, this should
> not be a problem for us, but we'll likely depend on ZSQLMethods
> (hence, on DTML) for a long time, since our ZSQLCatalog functionality
> is built heavily around it.

DTML is a standalone distribution, so I don't see any problem with it
being used independently. I think we can move the
App.special_dtml.DTMLFile class over to the DocumentTemplate
distribution to make that easier.

> This one is rather easy to fix, we just need to move the object from
> the Control_Panel into the Application Root, so I mention this for
> future reference, in case others have this problem.

Indeed. The control panel basically is a view these days. I think
there might be one or two "profilers" out there which add entries
there as well. All of these should be easy to change and move to the
application root. I've been especially annoyed by the profilers, which
all left broken objects in the control panel, without any UI to remove
them.

> But, for example, you committed some changes (and todos) relating to
> removing icons. Out of curiosity What is the reasoning behind this?

Icons don't add any functionality as such, so there were rather easy
to remove, following my premise that all of the ZMI should go sooner
than later. There's no really good technical reason to remove them -
if the ZMI should go we just have to start somewhere.

Hanno