Am 14.02.2009 um 20:33 schrieb Tres Seaver:
> Given that package's job in life, I strongly doubt that we need to
> about anybody using it outside of a Zope2 app. In fact, I think it
> might be a good idea just to fold the package back into Zope2 (I don't
> recall why it ever shipped separately).
If it is Zope2 specific then it should be part of Zope2: it's
monolithic but we love it anyway.
>> I'm not that familiar with Buildout but I would have thought that any
>> direct import dependencies should be listed - and zope.location
>> doesn't seem to be (neither are zope.event or zope.site for that
>> matter). OTOH the condition >= seems to be being incorrectly
>> interpreted. If this is a bug then it should be filed.
> The transitive dependencies of another dependency don't need to be
> listed: the problem Yuppie was fixing was a set of over-specific
> dependencies, now redundant in the new, egg-centric world of Zope
> I think another fix would be to move the Zope2 import to the top of
> list, so that its own, more specific dependencies would be installed
> first: however, I don't see much win over Yuppie's fix.
Yuppie's suggestion is fine with me and probably the second solution
best solution aside from just making it part of Zope2.
But that doesn't stop a bug being a bug. Dieter suggests that the bug
is with setuptools which gives it plenty of company. as far as I know.
Life used to be so simple with just distutils ;-)
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests