[Zope-dev] Re: ploneout - Or how using zc.buildout for a common
Zope2 project might look like
d.w.morriss at gmail.com
Thu Jan 25 13:45:43 EST 2007
Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
>> This is awesome, and by that I don't mean the fact that we have a
>> plone buildout, but that we actually have Zope 2 recipes for buildout.
>> I hope they can be moved to svn.zope.org for further development to
>> benefit the whole Zope 2 community.
> I believe this is just a matter of contrib agreements being sorted out
> (Hanno?). I guess I need to get mine sorted out as well if I'm going to
> keep working on this when it moves... :-/
>> I also see that workingenv was abandoned. That's very good to hear
>> because buildout has a lot of machinery for installing eggs already,
>> it would just've been duplicated with workingenv...
is there some advantage to the way that buildout handles eggs over
workingenv. as I understand it, workingenv *only* handles python setup
and does that well and transparently.
the "source bin/activate" dance is the only thing I see being a
detriment here(and with the latest workingenv, your shell prompt lets
you know you are in an env).
> Workingenv made it more complex than it needed to be (or buildout did,
> depending on which perspective you look at it from). I believe Hanno
> wanted to rescue the recipe in case others found it useful, but it's not
> used for now.
what about if I'm already using workingenv... and want to use zope or
plone in my workingenv?
currently, I don't see an easy way to use buildouts inside a workingenv,
whereas the rest of python world works great. I will have alot of
trouble explaining to my developer who already think zope smells that
they have to change the way they work to use zc.buildout recipes.
for example, I can't use the deliverance or lxml buildout with an
existing topp.deploy workingenv because of buildout's arbitrary egg
handling scheme. If zc.buildout didn't try to do so much, the python
would be installed transparently like everything else I easy_install.
as stated before, I don't mind using zc.buildout, but I don't want to
have to learn zc.buildout to use it meaningfully in my existing setup.
If a buildout recipes could be executed by themselves(like
buildout-zope2, buildout-deliverance, buildout-squid) as well as by
aggregated recipes. This would make buildout a killer tool inside my
workingenv rather than a choice I had to make between two technologies.
------ d. whit morriss ------
- senior engineer, opencore -
- http://www.openplans.org -
- m: 415-710-8975 -
"If you don't know where you are,
you don't know anything at all"
Dr. Edgar Spencer, Ph.D., 1995
More information about the Zope-Dev