Daniel Nouri wrote:
Martin Aspeli writes:
but in general that's the way to go. Since z3c.form became the
standard in the Zope 3 world I'd like to see Zope 2 and CMF moving
in the same direction. Unfortunately using plone.z3cform is no
option for CMF because it has a different license and
repository. *If* Plone wants to donate that code to the Zope
Foundation or someone writes something similar (maybe five.z3cform),
I'd be happy to help with CMF integration.
Bah, I hate these discussions. I'm sure Daniel Nouri would be happy to
relicense. Re-invention for the sake of a license is just too dumb.
I'd prefer to keep the name to avoid breaking existing packages, though.
Another option is to factor out a few things to a five.z3cform and
have plone.z3cform import from it as appropriate.
I just relicensed and moved plone.z3cform to the Zope repository:
Despite the "plone" namespace, it works fine in CMF and pure Zope 2.
A namespace is just a name :).
*Some* of the functionality (modules) is Plone or CMF specific. The
default configure.zcml aims to be usable without Plone or CMF.
There's a buildout.cfg in there that pulls Plone. I'd like to replace
it with a Zope2-only one (and maybe move the existing buildout to
The tests work without Plone.
By the way, I've collected a few conventions about maintaining software
It would be nice if everything in svn.zope.org would adhere to these
conventions. I'm just mentioning this since there may be some
differences to Plone's conventions.
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests