recommendations related to ATbased product versus Dexterity

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
David Bear David Bear
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

recommendations related to ATbased product versus Dexterity

It seems that Dexterity is the 'chosen path' for future plone product development. I am wondering if it also 'should' be considered as a replacement for AT style product development. Currently I have an AT based product living in plone 3.1. Knowing that I need to migrate to plone 4.x I am wondering if now would be the proper time to also consider 'converting' that AT-type and it content in to a dexterity derived type. Looking for any recommendations.

--
David Bear
College of Public Programs at ASU
602-496-0424

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to
monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second
resolution app monitoring today. Free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Plone-Users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-users
JonStahl JonStahl
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: recommendations related to ATbased product versus Dexterity

Archetypes is fully supported in Plone 4, and Plone 4 still ships with
AT.  At some point in the medium term future, Archetypes will become
an optional add on.  It is hard to say when that will happen, we've
been talking about it for a long time, but I suspect it is still AT
LEAST a year away, if not longer.

So, if you have the time/energy/desire to migrate something to
Dexterity now--awesome, go for it!  There is, however, little downside
to waiting a while longer if you prefer.  Dexterity will only continue
to improve in the meantime, and we aren't going to yank AT out from
under your feet too suddenly.

$.02,
jon


2012/4/4 David Bear <[hidden email]>:

> It seems that Dexterity is the 'chosen path' for future plone product
> development. I am wondering if it also 'should' be considered as a
> replacement for AT style product development. Currently I have an AT based
> product living in plone 3.1. Knowing that I need to migrate to plone 4.x I
> am wondering if now would be the proper time to also consider 'converting'
> that AT-type and it content in to a dexterity derived type. Looking for any
> recommendations.
>
> --
> David Bear
> College of Public Programs at ASU
> 602-496-0424
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to
> monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second
> resolution app monitoring today. Free.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Plone-Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-users
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to
monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second
resolution app monitoring today. Free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Plone-Users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-users
David Bear David Bear
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: recommendations related to ATbased product versus Dexterity

thanks for the input.

I think the point I am trying to reach is avoiding the need to ship an egg around to all buildouts that need this type. If this is a dexterity type -- and dexterity is part of my standard buildout -- then I will always be able to move the zodb around that has the dexterity derived content..

On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Jon Stahl <[hidden email]> wrote:
Archetypes is fully supported in Plone 4, and Plone 4 still ships with
AT.  At some point in the medium term future, Archetypes will become
an optional add on.  It is hard to say when that will happen, we've
been talking about it for a long time, but I suspect it is still AT
LEAST a year away, if not longer.

So, if you have the time/energy/desire to migrate something to
Dexterity now--awesome, go for it!  There is, however, little downside
to waiting a while longer if you prefer.  Dexterity will only continue
to improve in the meantime, and we aren't going to yank AT out from
under your feet too suddenly.

$.02,
jon


2012/4/4 David Bear <[hidden email]>:
> It seems that Dexterity is the 'chosen path' for future plone product
> development. I am wondering if it also 'should' be considered as a
> replacement for AT style product development. Currently I have an AT based
> product living in plone 3.1. Knowing that I need to migrate to plone 4.x I
> am wondering if now would be the proper time to also consider 'converting'
> that AT-type and it content in to a dexterity derived type. Looking for any
> recommendations.
>
> --
> David Bear
> College of Public Programs at ASU
> <a href="tel:602-496-0424" value="+16024960424">602-496-0424
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to
> monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second
> resolution app monitoring today. Free.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Plone-Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-users
>



--
David Bear
College of Public Programs at ASU
602-496-0424

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to
monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second
resolution app monitoring today. Free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Plone-Users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-users
JonStahl JonStahl
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: recommendations related to ATbased product versus Dexterity

David,

I think you have a mistaken impression of how Dexterity works.  It still uses content type definitions, just like Archetypes, and like AT, you would package your custom types into a product to distribute/deploy them.  You can build very simple things TTW, but practically speaking, this is not a deployment strategy.  

:jon

On Apr 4, 2012, at 9:13 PM, David Bear <[hidden email]> wrote:

thanks for the input.

I think the point I am trying to reach is avoiding the need to ship an egg around to all buildouts that need this type. If this is a dexterity type -- and dexterity is part of my standard buildout -- then I will always be able to move the zodb around that has the dexterity derived content..

On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Jon Stahl <[hidden email]> wrote:
Archetypes is fully supported in Plone 4, and Plone 4 still ships with
AT.  At some point in the medium term future, Archetypes will become
an optional add on.  It is hard to say when that will happen, we've
been talking about it for a long time, but I suspect it is still AT
LEAST a year away, if not longer.

So, if you have the time/energy/desire to migrate something to
Dexterity now--awesome, go for it!  There is, however, little downside
to waiting a while longer if you prefer.  Dexterity will only continue
to improve in the meantime, and we aren't going to yank AT out from
under your feet too suddenly.

$.02,
jon


2012/4/4 David Bear <[hidden email]>:
> It seems that Dexterity is the 'chosen path' for future plone product
> development. I am wondering if it also 'should' be considered as a
> replacement for AT style product development. Currently I have an AT based
> product living in plone 3.1. Knowing that I need to migrate to plone 4.x I
> am wondering if now would be the proper time to also consider 'converting'
> that AT-type and it content in to a dexterity derived type. Looking for any
> recommendations.
>
> --
> David Bear
> College of Public Programs at ASU
> <a href="tel:602-496-0424" value="+16024960424">602-496-0424
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to
> monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second
> resolution app monitoring today. Free.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Plone-Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-users
>



--
David Bear
College of Public Programs at ASU
602-496-0424

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to
monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second
resolution app monitoring today. Free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Plone-Users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-users
Laurence Rowe Laurence Rowe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: recommendations related to ATbased product versus Dexterity

JonStahl wrote
I think you have a mistaken impression of how Dexterity works.  It still uses content type definitions, just like Archetypes, and like AT, you would package your custom types into a product to distribute/deploy them.  You can build very simple things TTW, but practically speaking, this is not a deployment strategy.  
While you can still build custom Dexterity based classes and/or use schema definitions in Python code, the approach I take is to use only an XML schema definitions referenced by the Generic Setup profile (this is what the TTW schema editor operates on behind the scenes.) Any code I need I put into a 'behavior', which could just be a marker interface but can also include common fields shared by multiple content types.

Yes, the GS profile is still there, but there is significantly less python code than in a normal Archetypes based project. The particular fields you have on your content type becomes configuration rather than code. In the future I hope we have something like the plone.app.theming zip file format for distributing simple content types without the overhead of creating a complete python package. Perhaps we could call them 'Products' ;)

Laurence