[Product-Developers] Re: Plone Developer Cheatsheet

Daniel Nouri daniel.nouri at gmail.com
Fri May 30 12:31:05 UTC 2008

Dylan Jay writes:

> Daniel Nouri wrote:
>> Thanks.  I think the new structure is definitely an improvement.
>> It looks a bit overloaded though.  There are 34 points in "Current best
>> practices" without apparent order.  It's hard to find what you're
>> looking for.
>> I believe what we want is a table of contents at the top, and one more
>> level of structure.  I imagine something like:
>>   - Current best practices
>>     - Python and development tools
>>     - Installation and Infrastructure
>>     - Zope Component Architecture
>>     - Templates and CSS
>>     - Content Types
>>     - Views and Forms
> +1 for that. please have a go at restructuring with those sub
> headings.... except I think you only get 2 levels with kupu :(

What about we make this reStructuredText and put it into the Collective?
Gives you notifications and all that jazz.  Having to render it to HTML
before you copy and paste it into Plone is a minor nuisance.

I don't like Openplan's heading styles.  They make it hard for me to
distinguish between Heading 1 and 2.

>>   - Emerging best practices
>>     - [maybe same as above, except that we leave out empty sections]
> -1. Not comfortable with saying in advance whats going to be best
> practice. Dexterity etc can come along and make z2c.form obsolete
> before z3cform is commonly used for example. Who knows. The only
> reason I put that section there is so people who really want to put
> their fav competing technology in, has somewhere to put it.

Dexterity and z3c.form aren't conflicting, they're complementary.

I think we can predict that z3c.form and GS upgrades are "emerging best
practices".  Martin seems to agree as far as z3c.form is concerned.  I
don't know of any other examples.

>>   - Obsolete practices
>>     - ...
> +1. Thats a better name.
>> When I start working with Plone, I can work through the Current best
>> practices from top to bottom, picking everything that's declared "must
>> read" (alternatively: "beginner").  And by reading the "advanced"
>> articles/links in "Templates and CSS" I can specialize in
>> skinning/theming.  Relying on the implicit order of items for weight
>> isn't structured enough.  Especially when you have more than one author.
> So each item has a "level: begginer" etc associated with it? I'm ok
> with that. lets try it.

Yes, something like this.

Daniel Nouri

More information about the Product-Developers mailing list