[Zope-dev] Re: ploneout - Or how using zc.buildout for a common Zope2 project might look like

[whit]

Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> 
>> This is awesome, and by that I don't mean the fact that we have a 
>> plone buildout, but that we actually have Zope 2 recipes for buildout. 
>> I hope they can be moved to svn.zope.org for further development to 
>> benefit the whole Zope 2 community.
> 
> I believe this is just a matter of contrib agreements being sorted out 
> (Hanno?). I guess I need to get mine sorted out as well if I'm going to 
> keep working on this when it moves... :-/
> 
>> I also see that workingenv was abandoned. That's very good to hear 
>> because buildout has a lot of machinery for installing eggs already, 
>> it would just've been duplicated with workingenv...

is there some advantage to the way that buildout handles eggs over 
workingenv. as I understand it, workingenv *only* handles python setup 
and does that well and transparently.

the "source bin/activate" dance is the only thing I see being a 
detriment here(and with the latest workingenv, your shell prompt lets 
you know you are in an env).

> Workingenv made it more complex than it needed to be (or buildout did, 
> depending on which perspective you look at it from). I believe Hanno 
> wanted to rescue the recipe in case others found it useful, but it's not 
> used for now.

what about if I'm already using workingenv... and want to use zope or 
plone in my workingenv?

currently, I don't see an easy way to use buildouts inside a workingenv, 
whereas the rest of python world works great.  I will have alot of 
trouble explaining to my developer who already think zope smells that 
they have to change the way they work to use zc.buildout recipes.

for example, I can't use the deliverance or lxml buildout with an 
existing topp.deploy workingenv because of buildout's arbitrary egg 
handling scheme.  If zc.buildout didn't try to do so much, the python 
would be installed transparently like everything else I easy_install.

as stated before, I don't mind using zc.buildout, but I don't want to 
have to learn zc.buildout to use it meaningfully in my existing setup. 
If a buildout recipes could be executed by themselves(like 
buildout-zope2, buildout-deliverance, buildout-squid) as well as by 
aggregated recipes.  This would make buildout a killer tool inside my 
workingenv rather than a choice I had to make between two technologies.


-w
-- 

------ d. whit morriss ------
- senior engineer, opencore -
- http://www.openplans.org  -
- m: 415-710-8975           -

"If you don't know where you are,
  you don't know anything at all" 


Dr. Edgar Spencer, Ph.D., 1995