Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.intid/trunk/ - Remove a dependency on ``zope.container.contained.Contained``

2009-05-15 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martijn Faassen wrote: > We might consider moving IContained to zope.location - it just > subclasses from ILocation after all and doesn't add anything besides > being a marker interface. zope.intid already depends on zope.location. > The Contained

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.intid/trunk/ - Remove a dependency on ``zope.container.contained.Contained``

2009-05-15 Thread Chris McDonough
On 5/15/09 6:27 AM, Fred Drake wrote: > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:57 AM, Chris McDonough wrote: >> It's a partial step towards getting rid of a dependency that zope.intid has >> on >> zope.container. I'm thinking that maybe that IContained interface belongs in >> some other package (e.g. maybe z

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.intid/trunk/ - Remove a dependency on ``zope.container.contained.Contained``

2009-05-15 Thread Martijn Faassen
Stephan Richter wrote: > On Friday 15 May 2009, Fred Drake wrote: >> Keeping the dependency graph clean is great, and there's plenty to do >> there. But there's also something to be said about being able to keep >> a substantial portion of it in your head. The cleanliness of the >> graph isn't so

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.intid/trunk/ - Remove a dependency on ``zope.container.contained.Contained``

2009-05-15 Thread Stephan Richter
On Friday 15 May 2009, Fred Drake wrote: > Keeping the dependency graph clean is great, and there's plenty to do > there. But there's also something to be said about being able to keep > a substantial portion of it in your head.  The cleanliness of the > graph isn't so important if most users still

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.intid/trunk/ - Remove a dependency on ``zope.container.contained.Contained``

2009-05-15 Thread Martijn Faassen
Fred Drake wrote: > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:57 AM, Chris McDonough wrote: >> It's a partial step towards getting rid of a dependency that zope.intid has >> on >> zope.container. I'm thinking that maybe that IContained interface belongs in >> some other package (e.g. maybe zope.contained). Tha

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.intid/trunk/ - Remove a dependency on ``zope.container.contained.Contained``

2009-05-15 Thread Martijn Faassen
Chris McDonough wrote: > On 5/15/09 2:46 AM, Michael Howitz wrote: >> Am 15.05.2009 um 05:32 schrieb Chris McDonough: >> >>> Log message for revision 99961: >>> - Remove a dependency on ``zope.container.contained.Contained`` >>> (this is a dumb base class that defines __parent__ and __name__ >>> as

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.intid/trunk/ - Remove a dependency on ``zope.container.contained.Contained``

2009-05-15 Thread Fred Drake
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:57 AM, Chris McDonough wrote: > It's a partial step towards getting rid of a dependency that zope.intid has on > zope.container.  I'm thinking that maybe that IContained interface belongs in > some other package (e.g. maybe zope.contained).  That Container base class > i

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.intid/trunk/ - Remove a dependency on ``zope.container.contained.Contained``

2009-05-14 Thread Chris McDonough
On 5/15/09 2:46 AM, Michael Howitz wrote: > Am 15.05.2009 um 05:32 schrieb Chris McDonough: > >> Log message for revision 99961: >> - Remove a dependency on ``zope.container.contained.Contained`` >> (this is a dumb base class that defines __parent__ and __name__ >> as None and declares that the cla

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.intid/trunk/ - Remove a dependency on ``zope.container.contained.Contained``

2009-05-14 Thread Michael Howitz
Am 15.05.2009 um 05:32 schrieb Chris McDonough: > Log message for revision 99961: > - Remove a dependency on ``zope.container.contained.Contained`` >(this is a dumb base class that defines __parent__ and __name__ >as None and declares that the class implements IContained). What's the rea