Re: implication of removing portal_skins
Wichert Akkerman <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Jul 3, 2013, at 20:42, Nathan Van Gheem <[email protected]> wrote: > Just because we say we want to focus on one sector does not mean to abandon the other. Sometimes goals are just not compatible. For example I strongly feel that a Zope instance should only run a single website and that configuration should be in configuration files and not in databases, which is why I dropped all use of plone.registry, ZMI properties, local component registries, etc. in favour of z3c.appconfig. That allowed me to make things a lot simpler and manageable by normal admins without any Zope knowledge, but I had to abandon other things. My main point is that you need to have a single target audience in mind for all roadmap decisions, and I feel that that has been missing so far. Which customisation options make sense will depend strongly in your target audience. For enterprise-style usage TTW configurable is probably a strong anti-goal, while it would be very important for people who run 500 simple sites in a single instance. So depending on who you want to cater to you will need to make different design decisions. Wichert. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev