Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Paul Everitt wrote:
>> On Dec 22, 2008, at 6:36 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>>> Chris (and Agendaless) is of course free to do whatever he wants with
>>> BFG. And as I've shown many times, I'm very supportive of the great  
>>> work
>>> coming out of the Repoze project.
>>> However, if Repoze is aiming to bridge the gap between the mature Zope
>>> components and the WSGI-enabled world of other Python frameworks and
>>> tools, then we should at least debate when the pendulum swings further
>>> away from Zope.
>> Repoze != BFG.  Chris didn't change a single thing in Repoze itself.
> Mmm... Chameleon is not in the repoze.* namespace, but it's in the 
> Repoze repository, so if that's the definition of "Repoze" then he did.

OK, sue me, not my last comment. ;-)

Much of the argument here revolves around the fact that chameleon.core and
chameleon.zpt both *contain* ZCML.  Maybe neither should, given that they are
meant to be libraries useful outside of any particular framework.  If they did
not contain any ZCML, they would drop their dependency on zope.configuration,
and glue packages would need pick up the slack to configure them however they
chose. Maybe we can ask Malthe to make ZCML-based configuration of Chameleon a
documentation task rather than a software task.  That might be a far easier
thing to do than trying to reengineer the directives in zope.component, and it
would solve the problem of inappropriate dependencies in both directions.

- C

Repoze-dev mailing list

Reply via email to