Hey,
Jim Fulton wrote:
[snip]
> Then the question is whether the dependence of zope.app.zcmlfiles on
> zope.app.interface is needed. I'll look to see what that's about.
For the record, I'd be happy to see zope.app.interface and
zope.app.module gone from our dependencies.
zope.app.zcmlfiles t
On Jul 2, 2009, at 12:11 PM, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 2, 2009, at 7:58 AM, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>>
>>> and zope.app.zcmlfiles still have a hard
>>> dependency on zope.app.interface though.
>>
>> I don't think zope.app.zcml files
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>
> On Jul 2, 2009, at 7:58 AM, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>
>> and zope.app.zcmlfiles still have a hard
>> dependency on zope.app.interface though.
>
> I don't think zope.app.zcml files should be in it either. It was intended
> as a bridge to get us
On Jul 2, 2009, at 7:58 AM, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> zope.app.module provides support for persistemt modules.
>> zope.app.interface provides support for persistent interfaces. Both
>> rely on a highly experimental zodbcode. I don't have a p
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> zope.app.module provides support for persistemt modules.
> zope.app.interface provides support for persistent interfaces. Both
> rely on a highly experimental zodbcode. I don't have a problem with
> these being projects, but I don't think they s
