On 17. Nov 2007, at 02:15, Martin Aspeli wrote:
I understand the historical reasons behind these dependencies, but
I genuinely think we should pick a few libraries that are useful
to the outside world (zope.interface, zope.component,
zope.configuration, zope.annotation, zope.event come to
On Nov 16, 2007, at 8:15 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
...
In any case, I definitely see a case for both. I can't see a good
reason why we can't have support for simple XML-based component
registration without having to depend on the ZODB and tons of other
Zope eggs.
You're right. We can.
Jim Fulton wrote:
I understand the historical reasons behind these dependencies, but I
genuinely think we should pick a few libraries that are useful to
the outside world (zope.interface, zope.component,
zope.configuration, zope.annotation, zope.event come to mind) and
work to make these
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Friday 16 November 2007, Jim Fulton wrote:
Something is broken here and it needs to be fixed.
Well, the easiest solution would be to remove those misbehaving distributions
from the cheeseshop.
However, I think we kid ourselves if we think that the cheeseshop will
Hi Chris,
Then I tried to easy_install zope.security, but this pulled in most
of Zope, including the ZODB, ZConfig and zdaemon. That's a real
shame - no CA (at least not with ZCML) without having pretty much
all of Zope there. :(
Yup. Inappropriate dependency chain when you use the
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Nov 16, 2007 11:41 AM, Lennart Regebro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 16, 2007 3:38 AM, Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Help appreciated!
Well, I suggest you forget about ZCML and try to use the CA directly
from Python. The Pylons people would probably
Rob Miller wrote:
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Nov 16, 2007 11:41 AM, Lennart Regebro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 16, 2007 3:38 AM, Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Help appreciated!
Well, I suggest you forget about ZCML and try to use the CA directly
from Python. The Pylons people