[ZPatterns] ZPatterns and...CMF???
Sun, 11 Nov 2001 00:10:10 -0500
Hmm.. What is it about CMF that requires "ZODB stubs"? (and what the
heck is a "ZODB stub" anyway?) Is this all "well understood" terminology
over on the ZODB mailing list? I don't see it mentioned much by the CMF
On Saturday, November 10, 2001, at 09:19 PM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> At 07:25 PM 11/10/01 -0500, Gary Poster wrote:
>> Hello all. So, I've become somewhat enamored of CMF. Integrating my
>> with my CMF via ZPatterns suddenly seemed like a fantastic idea in
>> so I've been looking around to see what the Zope world has been doing
>> this general direction before I, in a fit of enthusiasm, wasted days of
>> thought and work that people smarter than me have already done and
>> discarded. It seemed all I would have to do is make the ZPatterns
>> have the correct CMF mix-in classes and build the mapping to view,
>> edit, and
>> metadata forms.
>> But nobody has said a darn thing I can find about doing ZPatterns with
>> except ...
>> ... Shane:
>> > Let's say you want CMF objects to be stored in an RDBMS. You don't
>> > to use ZODB stubs and you want a tree of persistent objects.
>> > can't help you. Can SmartObjects?
>> (no answer I can see to the final SmartObjects question, btw). Why
>> Shane write off the ZPatterns solution? I suppose I could ask him,
>> but...I'm asking here first. :-)
> Because ZPatterns as it exists today would require ZODB stubs to do
> what is described, at least based on what you've quoted above.
> Actually, it's not 100% true that ZPatterns can't help. You *could* do
> it, but you'd need to hack the base classes (primarily ObjectManager or
> the equivalent). It's messy. At one point I contemplated providing
> the necessary machinery for this in DataSkins, but it's just continuing
> the direction of kludging and hacking things that I feel has made
> ZPatterns an evolutionary dead-end. I've had enough trouble keeping
> ZPatterns' hacks current to the ever-more-frequent Zope releases,
> without trying to add any new capabilities.
> The new Zope component architecture is supposed to fix all this; in
> practice it will not address something like storing CMF objects in an
> RDBMS for a long while if ever, so long as the issue is one of
> supporting all the possible third-party classes deriving from CMF
> bases. To fix a problem like this requires aspect-weaving or other
> "open implementation" approaches, such as TransWarp provides. (Which
> is another reason I gave up some time ago on doing any extensive
> improvements to ZPatterns.)
> ZPatterns mailing list