[Grok-dev] Pushing for 1.0

Tim Terlegård tim.terlegard at valentinewebsystems.se
Thu Dec 20 02:40:24 EST 2007

On Dec 19, 2007, at 6:42 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:

> On Dec 19, 2007 12:42 PM, Tim Terlegård
> <tim.terlegard at valentinewebsystems.se> wrote:
>>   * viewlets
> What are the arguments for that being core grok, and not say a
> megrok.viewlets thingy?

For the same reasons we have adapters and utilities in grok,
they are damn useful to nearly everyone.

Of course it doesn't have to be in core. It was my belief that
grok core would include everything that is in zope3 core.
So I guess it's about expectations. I'd expect there to be a
grok.Viewlet as much as I expect to find grok.View. Not sure
why I expect this, maybe because of the very close relationship
to zope3.

A not so heavy argument is that viewlets in core would make
sure that it's maintained. You (or atleast me) think always twice
before introducing new dependencies as you don't know if
they are maintained and what state they are in.

It might give developers better impressions if this core feature
isn't left out to a third party package.

Joe User will immediately understand that viewlets are the de
facto solution for dynamic html snippets. He won't need to
scratch his head and look for third party solutions.

It's much nicer to not have to do import of megrok.viewlets  :)

Non of these arguments are that important. It's fine with me if
it's not in core.


More information about the Grok-dev mailing list