Ticket #9473 (closed PLIP: fixed)

Opened 7 years ago

Last modified 5 years ago

Include z3c.form

Reported by: erikrose Owned by: optilude
Priority: major Milestone: 4.1
Component: General Version:
Keywords: Cc: plip-advisories@…


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:1 Changed 7 years ago by optilude

From my side:

  • I think z3c.form is already in de-facto use, so the confusion argument *may* be moot
  • Performance - not sure
  • Documentation is better than anything else we have. :) Timo Stollenwerk wrote some tutorials recently as well. z3c.form reference docs are very detailed (but we need a Plone-like high level overview, which Timo's tutorial should help with)
  • If we put plone.app.registry into 4.0, I'll sign up to get it + plone.z3cform (+ Dexterity) over to z3c.form 2.0
  • Default widgets are good, at least better than formlib ones. We also have reasonable autocomplete and content browser widgets, much better than the formlib "uberselectionwidget"
  • Not sure about the markup, but from what I've seen, it looks good.


comment:2 Changed 7 years ago by esteele

  • Milestone changed from 4.0 to 4.x

comment:3 Changed 6 years ago by ldr

  • Milestone changed from 4.x to 4.1

Implied by plone.app.registry

comment:4 Changed 6 years ago by ldr

  • Owner set to optilude

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.


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?


comment:8 Changed 6 years ago by optilude

(In [39240]) Add PLIP buildout for PLIP refs #9472 and refs #9473. This basically allows the framework team to review the relevant code and run the tests. Other PLIPs (z3c.form control panels, discussion improvements) will add functionality that actually use these packages.

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)


comment:10 Changed 6 years ago by optilude

(In [39249]) Don't depend on the Plone egg. Refs #9473 and refs #10877

comment:11 Changed 6 years ago by optilude

(In [39250]) Don't depend on the Plone egg. Refs #9473 and refs #10877

comment:13 Changed 6 years ago by cah190

(In [40103]) Review for PLIP 9473. Refs #9473.

comment:14 Changed 6 years ago by cah190

  • Cc plip-advisories@… added

comment:15 Changed 6 years ago by mj

(In [40499]) Review for PLIP 9473. Refs #9473.

comment:16 Changed 6 years ago by esteele

(In [46244]) Merge in (related) PLIPs. Refs #9472. Refs #9473. Refs #10846.

comment:17 Changed 5 years ago by esteele


comment:18 Changed 5 years ago by esteele

  • Status changed from new to closed
  • Resolution set to fixed

comment:19 Changed 4 years ago by davisagli

  • Component changed from Infrastructure to General
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.