Ticket #9473 (closed PLIP: fixed)
Include z3c.form
Reported by: | erikrose | Owned by: | optilude |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | 4.1 |
Component: | General | Version: | |
Keywords: | Cc: | plip-advisories@… |
Description
This is a pseudo-PLIP where we can collect pros and cons of including z3c.form in Plone 4, as desired by #9288 and anything that desires #9472.
Things to Consider
- Is it worth the user confusion and code size increase to add another form framework?
- How's performance?
- How's documentation?
- 2.x cuts out a lot of backward-compatibility crud over 1.9. Can we get 2.x working with Plone? Everybody using it with Plone at the moment is using 1.9.
- Are the default widgets usable?
- Is the generated markup standards-compliant?
(I ripped most of these off from a conversation with Hanno. Thanks, Hanno!)
Change History
comment:3 Changed 6 years ago by ldr
- Milestone changed from 4.x to 4.1
Implied by plone.app.registry
comment:5 Changed 6 years ago by optilude
I'm happy to take this on.
Note that we're already on z3c.form 2.x with the latest plone.z3cform and plone.app.z3cform. Those two packages have already stabilised considerably, and we can probably make a "1.0" release of each as this PLIP is reviewed.
If substantial widget/markup changes are required, I'll need help. I suspect this won't be the case, though.
Martin
comment:6 Changed 6 years ago by esteele
Your PLIP has been accepted for consideration for Plone 4.1.
Framework Team voting on this PLIP was: Alec +1 Craig +1 Elizabeth +1 Laurence +1 Martijn +1 Matthew +1 Rob +1 Ross +1
The initial implementation deadline for your PLIP is October 1st, 2010. The Framework Team would certainly appreciate you finishing beforehand so that they may begin evaluating it as soon as possible. Announce its readiness here once your implementation is ready for review.
comment:7 Changed 6 years ago by optilude
Framework team -
I think this PLIP is "ready", since it's more of a dependency consideration exercise. We can obviously add plone.app.z3cform/plone.z3cform to the KGS at any time, but I don't see the need for another branch. More likely, the z3c.form control panel PLIP or the plone.app.discussion PLIP will drive the merging of this.
Do you agree?
Martin
comment:9 Changed 6 years ago by optilude
The buildout in the revision above should allow for this to be reviewed.
If accepted, merging tasks include:
- Add plone.app.registry as dependency of Plone package (if desired?)
- Add profile-plone.app.registry:default as an install dependency of the Plone GenericSetup profile (if desired?)
- Rewrite tests to use plone.app.testing instead of collective.testcaselayer (depends on #10846)
Martin
comment:10 Changed 6 years ago by optilude
comment:11 Changed 6 years ago by optilude
comment:12 Changed 6 years ago by robgietema
comment:13 Changed 6 years ago by cah190
comment:15 Changed 5 years ago by mj
comment:16 Changed 5 years ago by esteele
comment:17 Changed 5 years ago by esteele
Merged.
From my side:
Martin