Previously Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > Previously Martin Aspeli wrote:
> >> If you want to pull in, say, plone.supermodel (a "pure Zope 3" package 
> >> that should be re-usable and may be useful to BFG if it ever wants to 
> >> serialise Zope 3 schema interfaces to/from an XML representation) well, 
> >> it uses zope:* ZCML directives. Are you going to fork plone.supermodel? 
> > 
> > I would be very tempted at least. Or decide to not use supermodel.
> Which would mean that the BFG-intersecting parts of the repoze stack 
> would be a fork or re-implementation of all Zope stuff that was 
> interesting to it.

I don't see that. That is just my personal opinion and might not hold
for anyone else here.

Zope packages have a tendency to pull in half the zope world and
introduce a lot of zcml and security that you almost never want in
a non-zope environment. Unfortunately there appears to be little will in
zope-dev to actively change that. That's a shame, since it it
drastically reducing the chance of zope technology being accepted and
used by others.

If reimplementing something is easy to do (which is generally true
considering we all have Zope's source) and allows you to drop all that
extra baggage that - why not?


Wichert Akkerman <>    It is simple to make things.                   It is hard to make things simple.
Repoze-dev mailing list

Reply via email to