I understood there was a clear motivation for keeping marquis in a  
unique package.  Quoting Derek from this same thread:

>>> 5: I prefer to keep this a separate packages from Quills. Several  
>>> reasons.
>>> One, it's a great example of a bridge package. We need more  
>>> examples of
>>> packages that make other packages work together in our new eggified,
>>> buildoutified world. Two, it's a good example of how to extend  
>>> Vice. I'm
>>> afraid that, if it were incorporated into Quills, it wouldn't be  
>>> as good an
>>> example for people who don't use Quills but want to know how to  
>>> extend Vice.
>>> Three, it seems like keeping marquis separate allows Quills users  
>>> to choose
>>> their syndication framework. Choice is good and I'm not trying to  
>>> ram Vice
>>> down anyone's throat. Feel free to rip the base/fat syndication  
>>> code out of
>>> Vice. Make it a separate product, too, if you want, so people can  
>>> choose
>>> full-code back-compat. And feel free to (once it's solid and  
>>> released)
>>> publicize marquis prominently. I'm open to hearing other views on  
>>> this
>>> topic, but those are the reasons I'm tending to the keep-marquis- 
>>> separate
>>> view at the moment. Whaddya think?

I concur w/ Derek's motivation.  Providing the momentum behind  
buildout continues, this feels like the right approach - I would  
imagine the Quills buildout would pull in the appropriate branch of  
marquis.

Worth noting this interesting bit I found *somewhere* about some of  
the challenges of working with so many packages : http://tomster.org/ 
blog/archive/2007/10/22/releasing-package-based-products

:)

Paul

On Oct 24, 2007, at 12:05 PM, Tom Lazar wrote:

> tim, from what he told me on irc his motication was simply to get  
> it done real quickly that very afternoon (had some unexpected 5hrs  
> that popped up)
>
> if noone else beats me to it, i'll 'mentor this baby' end merge it  
> into a quills branch (or if all goes well perhaps straight into  
> trunk...)
>
> cheers,
>
> tom
>
> On 24.10.2007, at 15:07, Tim Hicks wrote:
>
>> Derek,
>>
>> I don't have any spare time to look at this at the moment, but I  
>> want to
>> say that this sounds very cool :).  (And to let the folks on  
>> quills-dev
>> know about what you are up to.)
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> p.s. It probably makes sense for this work to land on a branch of
>> Quills, rather than in an entirely separate package.  That should  
>> make
>> it easier to merge to the trunk for Quills 2.0.  Or am I
>> misunderstanding your motivation?
>>
>> Derek Richardson wrote:
>>> Announcing plone.marquis a freshly-minted, bug-ridden, feature- 
>>> deprived
>>> package to integrate Quills and Vice! ;)
>>>
>>> To check it out:
>>>
>>> svn co  https://svn.plone.org/svn/collective/plone.marquis/trunk  
>>> marquis
>>>
>>> Do the buildout dance
>>>
>>> Create a plone site with quills and with 'Outbound Syndication  
>>> (Vice)' and '
>>> quills.app' as starting profiles.
>>>
>>> Go to site setup and install the Quills products using the  
>>> quickinstaller.
>>> No need to bother with fatsyndication.
>>>
>>> Whiel in site setup, go to the configlet for 'Outbound  
>>> Syndication (Vice)
>>> and check the 'Enabled' and 'Show Config' boxes and save. Don't  
>>> migrate -
>>> that's just for old Plone-style syndication, not for Quills (base  
>>> and fat)
>>> syndication.
>>>
>>> Create a weblog. Marvel at the 'Syndication' tab. ;)
>>>
>>> Go into the syndication tab. Check 'Enable syndication'. Click  
>>> 'Add Feeds'.
>>>
>>> Marvel at the nice table. That's pbugni and alvalv's work from  
>>> the Naples
>>> sprint. They did a *great* job, imho.
>>>
>>> Explanation of the table:
>>>
>>> * Autodiscover: Doesn't work yet. Will become a radio button so  
>>> only one
>>> feed can be autodiscovered. This is apparently a best practice to  
>>> avoid
>>> freaking out novices.
>>> * Enabled: Click this if you want your feed available. You can  
>>> disable feeds
>>> without deleting them.
>>> * Name: Name your feed. This can be most anything. This does not  
>>> show in the
>>> feed, but a cleaned version of it appears in the url.
>>> * Recurse: Check if you want to feed items out of all  
>>> subcontainers under
>>> this. Currently does nothing in Quills, as it doesn't seem useful.
>>> * Published URL: Put a url in here if you want the published url  
>>> to be
>>> different from the local url. Useful for feedburner or if you  
>>> have an
>>> external auth system like we do such as CAS. Leave blank and it  
>>> will simply
>>> publish the local url.
>>>
>>> Add as many feeds as you want. The only thing that needs to be  
>>> unique is the
>>> name.
>>>
>>> Leave max items as -1 if you want all items returned by  
>>> IWeblog.getEntries()
>>> to always show up. Otherwise, put in a >= 0 limit to limit at the  
>>> feed
>>> level.
>>>
>>> Click apply. Ignore the bug red-and-orange error - this is a Vice  
>>> problem
>>> that has existed for months that will be fixed before, ummmm,  
>>> well, RSN.
>>> Even if you see the error, it is almost certain your feed  
>>> settings took
>>> effect (I've never seen them not).
>>>
>>> Click view. I didn't replace the portlet, so that's still your  
>>> old-style
>>> syndication links. But notice the links at the top, under 'Send  
>>> This' and
>>> 'Print This' in a base plone install - this is a viewlet that  
>>> renders the
>>> feed links (it's the default Vice viewlet) with the names you  
>>> gave in the
>>> config.
>>>
>>> Click a link. Hopefully it works. They're working for me, but I  
>>> imagine that
>>> topics and other stuff may break the feeds. Put the link in your  
>>> fav feed
>>> reader. See if it works - I've only tested with Thunderbird and  
>>> that not
>>> extensively, so it may not. Marvel at the potential breakage. ;)
>>>
>>> Notes (aimed at tomster and tim2p):
>>>
>>> 1: The basics are done. The details of how Quills Weblog and  
>>> WeblogEntry
>>> object should be syndicated is still the devil. You know Quills  
>>> much better
>>> than I, so feel free to change the adapters and ci. I'll fix as  
>>> pain arises
>>> during user test (yes, I now hope to include Quills AND Vice AND  
>>> marquis in
>>> user test starting Thursday morning. :) )
>>>
>>> 2: There is no back-compat with old Quills feed links. This is  
>>> clearly a
>>> *huge* problem, as feed links constitute an API. It's not my  
>>> pain, as I'm
>>> deploying a site that hasn't ever really had a working Quills.  
>>> Feel free to
>>> fix in marquis.
>>>
>>> 3: I'm gonna just remove the quills portlet in my user test.  
>>> Although my
>>> feed link viewlet needs some work, I prefer to have a standard  
>>> syndication
>>> UI across all my site than to have two UIs for the same thing.  
>>> Feel free to
>>> write marquis code to override the portlet or to check stuff into  
>>> Vice to
>>> help me improve my feeds viewlet, whichever you prefer to do. The
>>> icon-with-feed-format approach doesn't really work with Vice,  
>>> because you
>>> can have multiple feeds with the same format but different names and
>>> different recursion settings and different published urls.
>>>
>>> 4: There are Vice bugs that you will find as you play. I found  
>>> one with
>>> XHTML content tonight that had just never been exercised by our  
>>> tests. Feel
>>> free to fix in Vice or use our bug tracker:
>>> http://plone.org/products/vice/issues .
>>>
>>> 5: I prefer to keep this a separate packages from Quills. Several  
>>> reasons.
>>> One, it's a great example of a bridge package. We need more  
>>> examples of
>>> packages that make other packages work together in our new eggified,
>>> buildoutified world. Two, it's a good example of how to extend  
>>> Vice. I'm
>>> afraid that, if it were incorporated into Quills, it wouldn't be  
>>> as good an
>>> example for people who don't use Quills but want to know how to  
>>> extend Vice.
>>> Three, it seems like keeping marquis separate allows Quills users  
>>> to choose
>>> their syndication framework. Choice is good and I'm not trying to  
>>> ram Vice
>>> down anyone's throat. Feel free to rip the base/fat syndication  
>>> code out of
>>> Vice. Make it a separate product, too, if you want, so people can  
>>> choose
>>> full-code back-compat. And feel free to (once it's solid and  
>>> released)
>>> publicize marquis prominently. I'm open to hearing other views on  
>>> this
>>> topic, but those are the reasons I'm tending to the keep-marquis- 
>>> separate
>>> view at the moment. Whaddya think?
>>>
>>> Of course, other Quills devs are welcome to join in the play. I  
>>> request that
>>> people, other than you, who are going to make changes to Vice  
>>> talk to me
>>> first. But Marquis is open territory, as y'all know what needs to  
>>> happen as
>>> well or better than me. Feel free to repost this message to  
>>> quills-dev - and
>>> feel free to subscribe my address ['syndication' at ${my first  
>>> name + my
>>> last name} dot 'net'] to quills-dev if you think there's going to be
>>> conversation.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the opportunity to put Quills and Vice together! This  
>>> is a great
>>> use case for Vice and the entire Vice community is very happy you  
>>> brought it
>>> to us. I will continue to work on marquis as time permits and  
>>> need requires
>>> and I hope other Vice Squad members will join in as well.
>>>
>>> Derek
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> quills-dev mailing list
>> quills-dev@...
>> http://lists.etria.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/quills-dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Archive: http://www.openplans.org/projects/vice/lists/vice-squad/ 
> archive/2007/10/1193256105506
> To unsubscribe send an email with subject unsubscribe to vice- 
> dev@....  Please contact vice-dev- 
> manager@... for questions.
>