[Repoze-dev] Re: DRAFT: Invitation to a dance

[Chris McDonough]

On Sep 29, 2007, at 7:52 AM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:

> On 29 Sep 2007, at 01:21 , Chris McDonough wrote:
>> On Sep 28, 2007, at 5:04 PM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
>>
>>> My talk at PloneConf revolves around Plone's exit strategies into  
>>> a Zope3/WSGI/Paste/... world. Can I mention repozo? I'd hate to  
>>> steal your thunder, so I'll be happy to keep quiet about it. But  
>>> it seems like such a perfect fit.
>>
>> I think that'd be great.  Paul was also toying with the idea.
>
> So that sounds like you don't object? Because my talk is exactly  
> about how Plone should embrace The WSGI+Stack from the bottom pu.

Heck no I don't object!  Tres and Paul don't either. ;-)  Very much  
the opposite...  If we get Zope people interested in decomposing Zope  
2 and Plone into smaller more-well-defined bits using Products-as- 
eggs and (tasteful) middleware, and we reuse the appropriate Zope 3  
egg and WSGI efforts, it may become more feasible for non-Zope-using  
people to extend these smaller pieces even if they don't use the  
entire stack.  That would be very good for us.

We will try to make sure the repoze.zope2 thingy does Plone as well  
as it can between now and then.  There are definitely some bugs  
hanging around.

>
> I basically split Zope 2.11 into
>
> * Zope 3.4.x from eggs,
>
> * the ZODB3 from egg,
>
> * reusable packages that are maintained within the 'Zope' tree, but  
> could just as well be maintained outside:

Fantastic.  I will try to make these (or derived ones) dependencies  
of repoze.zope2.

> It certainly helps making non-Zope applications that don't use any  
> form of publisher transaction-aware. It just needs to be integrated  
> well with aborting and/or dooming transactions upon errors.

Thankfully, the txn middleware is simple so if it's not doing  
something right, it should be easy to fix.

> I've just tried to do this with a zopeproject-based application but  
> I couldn't get very far. mod_wsgi would ignore my  
> WSGIPythonExecutable setting, no matter where I pointed it to. I'll  
> keep trying, though.

That setting does need to point to an interpreter with the same  
Python version that mod_wsgi was compiled against, but I've not had  
trouble making it use alternate sandbox virtual Pythons.

- C

_______________________________________________
Repoze-dev mailing list
Repoze-dev at lists.repoze.org
http://lists.repoze.org/mailman/listinfo/repoze-dev