-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Chris McDonough wrote:
> On 4/27/09 1:28 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>> Chris McDonough wrote:
>>> But anyway, yeah. For someone who has never used zope.component, though,
>>> really not that important ("more strictly" compares to zope.component).
>> Reading that page as someone who does use zope.component, I was also not
>> entirely convinced of the rationale for this package. I'm not saying
>> there isn't one (though it smells a bit unfortunate that we're inventing
>> a plugin system that's almost the same as zope.component, yet
>> incompatible), but the aforementioned documentation didn't explain it
>> sufficiently IMHO.
> There's no *good* reason. The only reasons are bad.
> The primary driver is that
> we're trying to work with the Pylons community to share implementation bits.
> suggested that they might use something like zope.configuration to do system
> configuration. But it turns out that some in that community are completely
> befuddled by zope.component and those in that community who are not befuddled
> it are actively hostile to it. They may still be befuddled by and hostile to
> something that is simpler, but at least we'll have something to argue about
> technical grounds rather than emotion.
I can't see much reason for us to try to share code with people who
won't even attempt a rational evaluation of the candidate. -1 to
bikeshedding this thing further; +1 to an 'svn rm'.
Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com
Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Repoze-dev mailing list