[Plone-UI] [Plone-developers] Should we integrate ACE into p.a.theming?

Alex Clark aclark at aclark.net
Tue Sep 6 22:34:34 UTC 2011


On 9/6/11 6:07 PM, Jon Stahl wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 10:03 PM, Martin Aspeli<optilude+lists at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On 6 September 2011 23:00, Jon Stahl<jonstahl at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Martin Aspeli<optilude+lists at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 6 September 2011 21:40, Jon Stahl<jonstahl at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Martin Aspeli
>>>>> <optilude+lists at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> On 6 September 2011 04:36, Jon Stahl<jonstahl at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>>>>> 3) I was surprised to not be able to edit existing third-party
>>>>>>> themes
>>>>>>> I'd loaded into my test site.  I'd think that tweaking an existing
>>>>>>> canned theme would be one of the most-requested use-cases for this
>>>>>>> capability.
>>>>>> You should able to edit anything that's in the ZODB (but not on the
>>>>>> filesystem). Can you give me a reproducible test case?
>>>>> I used buildout to install several of the recent Plone 4.1 Diazo
>>>>> themes from http://plone.org/products.  The themes loaded up just fine
>>>>> and I can activate them.
>>>> In this case they're on the filesystem (or more likely, in eggs).
>>>> If you'd just uploaded zip files into the control panel, you could've
>>>> edited
>>>> them.
>>> As I suspected. But, I see this as problematic, since I think many new
>>> users will approach this with the first use-case of wanting to tweak
>>> an existing canned theme with their logo + other small changes, not
>>> start from scratch and/or upload a Zip (which they'd get from where?).
>> I actually think more people will install themes as zip files than fiddle
>> with buildout and eggs. If you're not a developer, running buildout is
>> scary. At least that's the basis of the thinking behind the zip file
>> resource format.
> OK, I see your (and David's) point... and agree that it makes sense.
> I guess I was thinking too old-skool. ;-)   So, we need to start
> educating Diazo theme builders that packaging themes as Zips rather
> than as eggs is now "new best practice."

Indeed. I tried to do this with the "Diazo theming sprint" a few months 
back. And several folks followed the "mentioning the zip file first" 
pattern. E.g.

- http://plone.org/products/plonetheme.earthlingtwo

But the controversial part was: I put the zips inside a Python package 
because that struck me as the most logical thing to do. It struck other 
folks as the opposite. The logic was based almost entirely on one thing: 
easy distribution. If I create a zip inside a Python package, I can use 
existing tools to publish it (i.e. mkrelease). If not, I'd have to 
upload TTW (which I ended up doing anyway to quell complaints).

Anyway, in the real world, with elro's resource directory feature in 
p.r.zope2instance, I suspect *just zips* has at least a fighting chance 
to catch on. It would stand a better chance if we built a new place to 
upload them (e.g. an overhauled PSC perhaps integrated with thememanager[1])


[1] https://github.com/collective/collective.thememanager

>>>   Is editing stuff on the filesystem straight-out impossible?  (Perhaps
>>> copying it into the ZODB first?)
>> If the theme is in a filesystem resource directory, it's not too hard.
>> If the theme is in an egg, it's impossible (or at least a really bad idea).
>> I think a better approach might be a "create a copy" button and let you edit
>> that.
> The above notwithstanding, I do think this "create a copy" approach is
> a good idea.  (I agree that trying to directly edit egg-based code is
> a bad idea.)  I can imagine a pretty common case for, say, a
> university hosting setup, might be: make a buildout with 10 canned
> "base" themes, then let site admins copy-and-customize those themes
> TTW.
> :jon

Alex Clark · http://aclark.net

More information about the UI mailing list