Re: Schema provider/CA lookup status

Martin Aspeli wrote:
[snip]
> To echo something Ben told me in Norway, we're sometimes so hung up on the
> new and cool but not-quite-there-yet stuff in Zope 3 (i.e. z3 schemas are
> great, but still don't cover all the functionality people needor involve
> more integration work to get them to work with CMF, and the widgets are less
> mature, etc) that we stop innovating in Archetypes. I completely agree that
> we shouldn't overstretch ourselves, and that making AT more Z3-compatible
> (the componentisation work) is paramount, but that doesn't mean we can't
> also make AT more flexible and useful. Until the evidence suggests
> otherwise, AT will have a looong shelf life still. :)

Is that really the problem?  That we are so hung up on Z3?  And more
interestingly, what's the reason why some of us keep constantly
goggling at Z3?

I have nothing against putting tested and reasonable innovations into
AT, but as things stand not many people are working on AT itself, and
working with AT can be frustrating and a mystery.  (At the same time,
I have to say that I think AT has served us very well in the past.)

I think the problem is with maintenance and energy.  We all know very
well that we don't have infinite resources; should these now go into
something that *has* to go away sooner or later, or something that is
maintained by more people than a few Plone developers?

Please, let's make a list of what's "not quite there".  I hear this
often and I find it a bit vague.

Note that I do not comment the addition of the schema provider stuff here.


Daniel



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642