Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for z (was Re: Zope and zope)

2004-04-20 Thread Stephan Richter
On Thursday 15 April 2004 17:11, Martijn Faassen wrote: Anyway, I guess the tokenizer is fine too, and might even be faster for all I know, just seems an unfortunate duplication of work, plus I checked in importchecker for little reason. :) No, Fred was just a bit faster than me with

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for z (was Re: Zope and zope)

2004-04-15 Thread Jim Fulton
Sidnei da Silva wrote: On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 11:46:27AM +0200, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: | - The packages in z can be used for more than just Zope | | +2 So, here's an idea: - Move component-architecture packages out of 'zope' into 'ca', and then we don't have the 'zope' vs 'Zope'

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for z (was Re: Zope and zope)

2004-04-15 Thread Sidnei da Silva
On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 08:59:44AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: | So, what about this: | | zope.component | zope.interfaces (?) | zope.configuration | zope.testing | zope.schema (soon-to-be-dead?) | | - All move to 'ca.*' | | Most of this has nothing to do with the component architecture. | | ca

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for z (was Re: Zope and zope)

2004-04-15 Thread Jim Fulton
Sidnei da Silva wrote: On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 08:59:44AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: | So, what about this: | | zope.component | zope.interfaces (?) | zope.configuration | zope.testing | zope.schema (soon-to-be-dead?) | | - All move to 'ca.*' | | Most of this has nothing to do with the component

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for z (was Re: Zope and zope)

2004-04-15 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Thu, 2004-04-15 at 09:25, Jim Fulton wrote: From the zope package README.txt: Zope Project Packages The zope package is a pure namespace package holding packages developed as part of the Zope 3 project. Generally, the immediate subpackages of the zope package should be

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for z (was Re: Zope and zope)

2004-04-15 Thread Jim Fulton
Lennart Regebro wrote: From: Sidnei da Silva [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Move component-architecture packages out of 'zope' into 'ca', and then we don't have the 'zope' vs 'Zope' issue anymore. 'ca' feels weird. Canada? caca? I don't like it. 'z' is better then. Of course that means that suddenly the

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for z (was Re: Zope and zope)

2004-04-15 Thread Jim Fulton
Barry Warsaw wrote: On Thu, 2004-04-15 at 09:25, Jim Fulton wrote: From the zope package README.txt: Zope Project Packages The zope package is a pure namespace package holding packages developed as part of the Zope 3 project. Generally, the immediate subpackages of the zope package

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for z (was Re: Zope and zope)

2004-04-15 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Thu, 2004-04-15 at 10:23, Jim Fulton wrote: Each separately distributed package will have a DEPENDENCIES.cfg that is created by hand and that *constrains* dependencies on other packages. It makes explicit the intended dependencies. Dependencies not listed here are bugs. Adding depenencies

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for z (was Re: Zope and zope)

2004-04-15 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Thu, 2004-04-15 at 11:39, Casey Duncan wrote: Additionally (and Jim and I have discussed this amongst ourselves) I feel strongly that the dependancies should be enforced by tests. Good point. The dependancy tests might need to be separate from unittests because they would probably

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for z (was Re: Zope and zope)

2004-04-15 Thread Stephan Richter
On Thursday 15 April 2004 11:39, Casey Duncan wrote: Additionally (and Jim and I have discussed this amongst ourselves) I feel strongly that the dependancies should be enforced by tests. That is, if you introduce and errant dependancy (by adding an import to a new package not in the stdlib or

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for z (was Re: Zope and zope)

2004-04-15 Thread Martijn Faassen
Stephan Richter wrote: On Thursday 15 April 2004 11:39, Casey Duncan wrote: Additionally (and Jim and I have discussed this amongst ourselves) I feel strongly that the dependancies should be enforced by tests. That is, if you introduce and errant dependancy (by adding an import to a new package

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for z (was Re: Zope and zope)

2004-04-15 Thread Stephan Richter
On Thursday 15 April 2004 13:22, Martijn Faassen wrote: Note that for checking dependencies in Python code I still think this tool could be improved by using technology from importchecker.py http://cvs.zope.org/Zope3/utilities/importchecker.py which can use Python's compiler module to lift

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for z (was Re: Zope and zope)

2004-04-15 Thread Martijn Faassen
Stephan Richter wrote: On Thursday 15 April 2004 13:22, Martijn Faassen wrote: Note that for checking dependencies in Python code I still think this tool could be improved by using technology from importchecker.py http://cvs.zope.org/Zope3/utilities/importchecker.py which can use Python's