[Zope3-dev] Discussion: Configuration vs. Configuration

[seb bacon]

On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 18:18, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> For services and other things that live in ++etc++site, there are two
> different concepts that are currently both called "configuration".


We talked about this at the UK sprint; I had intended to work on this aspect of things, but ran out of time.

In a straw poll, everyone agreed with your position.  Jim agreed in
principle to changing the name of "configuration managers" to something
else.

Configuration in the Configuration Manager sense is all about hooking up
different interfaces in different ways.  Therefore, we came up with the
following suggestions:

 - Wiring
 - Plumbing
 - Connecting

The final idea was preferred because we get to call zcml "Zope
Connection Markup Language"

We also discussed a nice icon to represent active and inactive
connections.  The preferred notation was something along the lines of
the 'lollipop' interface notation in UML:

Inactive:  -  o--
Active:    -o--

We also discussed variations on wires, pipes and light switches.

Seb


> 
> One is what *I* would call configuration: for example, the
> ErrorLogging service has a "control panel" where you can configure how
> many exceptions to keep and several other options.  The explanatory
> text at the top of the page even uses the word "configure".  Many
> other objects also have such configurations, e.g. caches, database
> adapters, and the text index.
> 
> The other form of configuration is of course the "configuration
> manager".  E.g. /++etc++site/default/ConfigurationManager/.  What is
> configured here is the "external usage" of a service, utility, cache,
> db connection, and so on.  Exactly what the configuration parameters
> are here depends on what kind of object, but at minimum there's the
> "activation state" (Active, Registered or Unregistered) and often a
> permission; sometimes also a name and/or an interface, and/or a
> component path.
> 
> The problem as I see it is that many object support both types of
> configuration, so there is plenty of opportunity for confusion
> (e.g. in documentation, and when talking about configuring these
> objects).
> 
> I fear that it is going to be difficult to document things if we stick
> with using "configuration" for both concepts.  Personally, I can't
> help thinking of the former kind as configuration (the concept is not
> unique to Zope), so I'm looking for a different word to use for the
> latter -- but I'm open to other solutions.
> 
> --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Zope3-dev mailing list
> Zope3-dev@zope.org
> http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope3-dev
-- 

   [] j a m k i t

        seb bacon
T:  020 7549 0520
F:  020 7490 1152
M:  07968 301 336
W: www.jamkit.com