[Zope3-Users] Re: ZCML, practicality, purity (was "Excellent perspective...")

[Martijn Faassen]

Jeff Shell wrote:
[snip lots of good stuff about configuration in python code and its 
drawbacks]

> But if that were a route one
> decided to use, one would have to lay down VERY strict rules.
> Otherwise we lose all the benefits of the Component Architecture and
> start heading back into a free-for-all mess.

I just wanted to indicate, belatedly as I just found this discussion, my 
strong agreement. If configuration moves into Python code, it should be 
under very strict supervision indeed.

[snip lots more good stuff]

>. I think that the ZCML "situation" could be
> improved with:
> 
> * simpler use - let Python code say what it adapts and implements. Let
> Python code subclass from BrowserView. Use ZCML to just register and
> name the object. Promote this in documentation, advocacy articles, and
> so on.
> 
> * alternate syntax? Not Python, but maybe something python-"ish" but
> geared towards entering the kind of data references that one has to
> type a lot in configuration.
> 
> * cut down on the magics like dynamic class creation. this was a
> frustrating surprise when I first encountered it a couple of months
> ago.
> 
> * for many of the core ZCML configuration directives, explain their
> Python alternative. Not to promote its use when writing large systems,
> shared toolkits or frameworks, but to show how to test or just to use
> adapters and utilities in small applications that don't require the
> full Zope toolkit.

And all of these are a good idea for exploration.

Regards,

Martijn