[Zope] - Why I don't think Zope will work for me

[Jim Fulton]

Andreas Kostyrka wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 30 Dec 1998, Jim Fulton wrote:
> 
> > Curtis Galloway wrote:
> > >
> > > Zope is very cool.  Zope has many useful features.  But I believe that storing
> > > most of your useful data inside an opaque object database is a fatal flaw.
> >
> > This is a rather strong statement.
> >
> > I could say that requiring me (and my customers) to have access
> > to the application file system, or to do without long-running transactions
> But I do not require file system access. The point is that I can use the
> filesystem (if I'm allowed too). Even better I can upload an .tar.gz of
> the whole site at once, ...

Would you allow both through the web editing and file system editing?
How would this interact with CVS?

> > is a fatal flaw.  But I won't. ;)
> >
> > > I learned through painful experience that having your project data in text
> > > files in a filesystem is a Good Thing.  You can use standard UNIX tools to
> > > manipulate these files.  You can use EMACS or vi or any other tool to edit
> > > them.  And most importantly, you can use CVS or RCS or any other similar tool
> > > for source control.
> > >
> > > I just don't see how you can build a large project with multiple developers
> > > using a Netscape browser as your editing tool, unless I'm missing something
> > > very obvious about the way Zope works.
> >
> > We do it all the time.  Of course, I'd much *rather* use emacs as
> > my editing tool.  When Zope has FTP support, then this will be possible.
> > Actually, when FTP support lands, a number of interesting scenarios will
> > be possible.
> Not really. FTP is not acceptable as it unencrypted. ;) That doesn't work
> to well with my paranoia. (Sorry, some of this paranoia even lingers
> around when my sysadmin hat is stowed away *g*)
> 
> >
> > Note that you don't absolutely have to use Zope's database if you don't
> > want to.  For example, you could use ZPublisher and DocumentTemplate
> > without using the rest of the Framework.  Of course, you'd lose alot
> > of functionality, but you'd retain alot of cool benefits.
> Some of the functionality. But then, CVS and staging servers work REALLY
> WELL with dialup connectivity, while versioning in the production server
> requires me to be online during the work, ...
> (As it is the production server, I just cann't copy over the database
>  files and replace them later, some user might changed the database,
>  right?)

Right, but you can export and import just the parts of the site you are 
working on.
 
> > It might be interesting if you or someone else came up with a kind of
> > Zope folder that simply got it's objects from a file-system directory.
> > Presumably, the subobjects would be made available as Zope objects that
> > played within the Framework, but were actually stored in the file system.
> Actually, I've come up with a tiny Zope replacement :)

It is important to note that Zope includes technology formerly knows
as Bobo as well as the higher level Zope framework.

If you use ZPublisher and DocumentTemplate, you are using Zope. :)

Jim

--
Jim Fulton           mailto:jim@digicool.com
Technical Director   (888) 344-4332              Python Powered!
Digital Creations    http://www.digicool.com     http://www.python.org

Under US Code Title 47, Sec.227(b)(1)(C), Sec.227(a)(2)(B) This email
address may not be added to any commercial mail list with out my
permission.  Violation of my privacy with advertising or SPAM will
result in a suit for a MINIMUM of $500 damages/incident, $1500 for
repeats.