[Zope-dev] Re: ploneout - Or how using zc.buildout for a common Zope2 project might look like

Jim Fulton jim at zope.com
Thu Jan 25 18:47:51 EST 2007

On Jan 25, 2007, at 5:44 PM, Ian Bicking wrote:
>  workingenv is development-centric, while buildout is deployment- 
> centric.  This does not necessarily mean "the best tool for the  
> job", because focusing on development and ignore deployment isn't a  
> good job, nor the other way around.

buildout focusses on both.


> If *Plone* becomes incompatible with workingenv that'd be bothersome

I agree.

> But if a buildout is incompatible, eh... who knows,

I would hope that buildout would not have to be compatible with  
workingenv, whatever that means, in order for Plone to be  
compatible.  Then again, I'm not sure what compatibility means in  
this context.

> it might even make sense to create something like a "freeze this  
> workingenv as a buildout" script.  That one directory structure  
> can't be both at the same time isn't a huge problem in my mind.

Deployment involves far more than getting the software installed.


> Path names aren't really the problem.  We got a little guerrilla  
> war going on over the setuptools' script-generating monkey  
> patches.  We'd both probably prefer a proper way to change how  
> setuptools generates scripts, but it's not clear that we could  
> really be compatible -- enumeration vs. changing the path is a  
> totally different strategy.

Um, we're both changing the path -- just in different ways.

>   I'd rather see easy-install.pth become a better package database,  
> or some other strategy of external requirement specifications,  
> instead of building it into scripts.

We certainly disagree there. OTOH, I wouldn't be opposed to having a  
recipe for generating scripts that used the .pth files created by  

> I understand the issue Jim is trying to solve here, but putting  
> everything into the buildout.cfg and then imperatively setting up  
> the files from there bothers me and does not make development easy  

This seems to be a matter of taste.  I like developing with buildout.  
It makes development easier for me.  :) To each his own.

> That's mostly the problem.  Then workingenv would do its part by  
> monkeypatching distutils and setuptools to install things locally,  
> and changing site.py to not automatically pick up things globally.

I applaud you for this effort.  I chose to work below easy_install  
and site.py
rather that trying to bend/monkey-path it to my will.


Jim Fulton			mailto:jim at zope.com		Python Powered!
CTO 				(540) 361-1714			http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation	http://www.zope.com		http://www.zope.org

More information about the Zope-Dev mailing list