[Grok-dev] megrok.chameleon and (custom) template namespaces

Uli Fouquet uli at gnufix.de
Fri Apr 15 20:15:15 EDT 2011

Hi JJ and JW,

Am Freitag, den 15.04.2011, 22:25 +0200 schrieb Jan-Jaap Driessen:
> On 15 April 2011 21:40, Jan-Wijbrand Kolman <janwijbrand at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Yesterday and today, Jan-Jaap and me migrated most of our codebase to
> > use megrok.chameleon. However, we do rely on the megrok.chameleon's
> > trunk now, for this particular reason:
> >
> > We noticed that the viewlet and the viewletmanager namespaces were
> > missing from the template context (when rendering a viewletmanager and
> > viewlets of course).
> >
> > We started digging and noticed that Grok's idea of template namespaces
> > was effectively put into the options template namespace by z3c.pt (on
> > which megrok.chameleon depends). This would include the "custom"
> > namespace a developer could define through the `def namespace()` method
> > on views.

Thanks for fixing that!

> > Can I ask the current megrok.chameleon "maintainers" (I believe Uli and
> > Sylvain) 1) to have a look at the patch+test
> > (http://zope3.pov.lt/trac/changeset/121428/megrok.chameleon)

Looks fine to me.

>  and 2) tell
> > me if it is release-worthy and

I see two blockers for release currently:

  - page reloading should work (at least optional)
  - the docs need a serious upgrade (at least some upgrade guide)

>  3) grant me pypi-permissions to indeed
> > make the release?

Sure, you're both owners now.

> > Thanks in advance!
> > regards, jw
> Also, as far as I can see, megrok.chameleon currently does not
> configure auto-reloading of chameleon templates in development mode.
> JW, can we look into the best way to configure this before we make a
> new release of megrok.chameleon?

Yep, I'd love to see that finished before release too.

> How do you feel about the pylons/pyramid approach of configuring
> template reloading? ->
> http://docs.pylonsproject.org/projects/pyramid/1.0/narr/templates.html#reload-templates-section

Nice! If we could reproduce it that would be great. Please tell if you
found out more about that, although I'll have a look into this myself.

What do you think about pushing the next release to version number 2.0
(skipping 1.x)? I noticed that also z3c.pt tries to stay in touch with
Chameleon version-number-wise.

Best regards,


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Url : http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/grok-dev/attachments/20110416/73561f87/attachment.bin 

More information about the Grok-dev mailing list