[Zope-CMF] Re: Plone participation in the CMF list

[yuppie]

Hi!


Geoff Davis wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 17:30:20 +0100, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
> 
> 
>>It would help everyone if the CMF side opened up a little  
>>more to ideas coming down from Plone, and if the Plone side stopped  
>>reinventing wheels that would be much better off (and benefit  
>>everyone) in the CMF or other non-Plone core products.
> 
> 
> Perhaps some specifics would help.
> 
> * What wheels do you think Plone has reinvented?
> 
> * Are there any particular things in Plone that you think should be pushed
> down into CMF?

If you ask me most of the install/setup/migration stuff of Plone is 
implemented in the wrong layer. The way Plone uses the CMFDefault 
PortalGenerator and customizes CMFDefault settings looks quite strange.

AFAICS Plone could benefit from CMFSetup and CMFSetup could benefit from 
the experience Plone people have with install/setup/migration tasks. 
CMFSetup still needs a lot of work, but it could became a generic 
framework that replaces (at least big parts of) CMFQuickInstallerTool 
and the Plone migrations machinery. CPS people already contribute to 
CMFSetup.


In general I'm skeptic if people want to contribute new products. CMF 
still needs a lot of consolidation work. And CMF has to be modernized to 
benefit from Five features.


I guess the first thing we need is a unit test framework that is more 
similar to Zope 3 and Plone tests. Most people not familiar with CMF 
unit tests have problems writing new ones. I don't like the idea to 
depend on an external product, but maybe CMFTestCase could become part 
of CMF?


Just my 2 cents.

Cheers,

	Yuppie