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

[Chris McDonough]

Continue paying for mistake of forgetting to cc list.

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Martin Aspeli <optilude at gmx.net>
> Date: September 29, 2007 9:24:24 AM EDT
> To: Philipp von Weitershausen <philipp at weitershausen.de>
> Cc: Chris McDonough <chrism at plope.com>, Christian Theune  
> <ct at gocept.com>, Martijn Faassen <faassen at startifact.com>, Jim  
> Fulton <jim at zope.com>, Ian Bicking <ianb at colorstudy.com>, "Phillip  
> J. Eby" <pje at telecommunity.com>, Rob Miller <ra at burningman.com>,  
> Joel Burton <joel at joelburton.com>, Graham Dumpleton  
> <graham.dumpleton at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: DRAFT:  Invitation to a dance
>
> Hi guys,
>
>> 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.
>
> I'll certainly be in the audience agreeing with that sentiment. :)
>
> Perhaps it's possible to get a repoze demo (or maybe a lightening  
> talk?) to show off?
>
>>>> I actually had the same idea, but I went further and tried  
>>>> using  zope.publisher. That has several advantages, because   
>>>> zope.publisher is already WSGI-aware and quite pluggable. I got   
>>>> reasonably far, in such that I could render the ZMI (but  
>>>> without  security). My work is here: http://svn.zope.org/Sandbox/ 
>>>> philikon/ five.publication/. It's a buildout and should  
>>>> therefore be  reproducible for anyone who wants to try out.
>>> Yup, looks familiar. ;-)  We had a 22nd-level goal (not very   
>>> important at all, IOW) of letting people create "obob" plugins   
>>> without needing to know anything about the Zope component   
>>> architecture, so that's why it's the way it is currently.
>> Yes, and that approach has some appeal to it. I shall look more  
>> into  "obob"... Seriously, guys, you couldn't have picked a better  
>> name? :)
>
> /me had the same thought.
>
> Although calling the pieces 'bobs' is kind of cool.
>
> So ... everyone here seems at least cautiously optimistic about  
> this approach. My question is, how do we move forward. Do you plan  
> to push this to zope-dev? Or as a proposal? Or do we need to do  
> more before we're at that point?
>
> I think to get people on board and discussing this in the right  
> way, we'd need a pretty clearly written proposal that sets out the  
> benefits explicitly and doesn't assume people know a lot about WSGI  
> etc. There also needs to be some kind of realistic plan that says  
> what needs to happen (in what order) for this to be a reality and  
> what resources are needed, otherwise it's too intangible (it feels  
> a bit intangible to me right now, but that's just because I haven't  
> been able to actually try it out).
>
> Martin
>

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