On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 9:05 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
On 4/11/09 7:32 PM, Roger Ineichen wrote:
That much dependency cleanup would be fantastic.
Yes, cool, but what exactly whould you like to cleanup?
The bits that I use are already pretty nicely cleaned up. But in
I can't believe no one's suggested Zope Mega, yet.
Chris
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.comwrote:
Hey,
Joy, another naming discussion. Oh well, I started it. :)
Zope Toolkit is better name than Zope Framework. I'm fine with renaming
Zope Framework to
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 7:21 PM, Wichert Akkerman wich...@wiggy.net wrote:
Previously Chris Rossi wrote:
I was wondering if the Zope collective had given any consideration to
allowing constants to be defined in interfaces. To be clear, these are
constant values that make up the protocol
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
Using an interface class for a constant container would often be handy
but it
might be an inappropriate use of interface classes.
I would argue that it is appropriate, but that's probably related to my
experience with
Hello,
I was wondering if the Zope collective had given any consideration to
allowing constants to be defined in interfaces. To be clear, these are
constant values that make up the protocol defined by the interface. Just to
have a concrete example, let's say we're modeling an http response: