[Grok-dev] Re: Salt & z3c.autoinclude

[Martijn Faassen]

Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Ethan Jucovy wrote:
> 
>> If I end up having a second zope platform which wants to use it (which 
>> currently looks unlikely, and which I can't really imagine ever 
>> needing anyway) I would need to be able to register the package as a 
>> plugin for multiple platforms, each with a different starting point 
>> for its ZCML.
> 
> Actually, I think this is kind of important. What if I write a package 
> that can work both with Grok and Plone?

A *plugin* that plugs into Grok and Plone? Could you give an example of 
such a thing? I have a very hard time imagining what that could be.

I think we should define a plugin as something that uses APIs in the 
core to plug into it. It will for instance implement an interface 
defined in the core, and register itself as a utility, or will adapt 
something in the core, or be a view for it. The relationship between the 
plugin and the core could be limited to something only expressed in ZCML 
as Ethan mentioned, but usually there will be a code relationship as 
well (imports).

[snip]
 > I can certainly see situations where you have
 > an auto-includable package that works with Plone and Grok, but where the
 > configuration is slightly different for each.

Loading up dependencies we already have covered with the autoinclude 
directive.

We need to distinguish auto-inclusion from loading up plugins. 
Auto-inclusion means automatically also loading the ZCML of that 
dependency. A dependency like that could be used by Plone or Grok; 
that's not a problem. The dependency relationship is the other way round 
in that case though.

[snip]
 > Then again, this may be YAGNI. It seems that we shouldn't restrict the
 > format so that it becomes impossible to support this, though. :-/

I think we should indeed say YAGNI for a while and see how this works 
out for Plone. When real-world problems come up, we will come back and 
talk about adding behaviors.

Regards,

Martijn