"Andrew M. Kuchling" wrote:
> I've heard nothing about my offer to package ZODB separately, and
> today's the day I copy stuff onto a laptop for the trip. Some
> direction here would be nice; there's lots of other stuff I can hack
> on if I don't get a response.
Sorry Andrew, spoke with Brian about this, keep in mind I am *no*
expert on packaging.
We're not exactly sure what a good long term solution is. We'd love to
see Zope all in one big package, but there are some (minor) technical
things to be concerned about, like when objects are unpickled they must
be able to find their class, and if you move stuff around you need to be
able to catch things like that by either using a huge string of aliases
or maybe something that catches ImportErrors at unpickle time and tries
to fix up the object.... I don't know; hairy stuff though.
ZODB is a big different in that there aren't any pickles anyhwhere with
ZODB in them (with the exception, I guess, of Persistence). ZODB may be
very easy to package, although I know that there is some voodoo
associated with where Persitence lives to be bw-compatable with BoboPOS
All of the other issues, dependency on ExtensionClass etc, are beyond me
and we don't have any advice really other than 'try it and let us know
how it went'. I think ZODB is a great place to start since everyone
could use a nice object database and your article focuses alot on it.
Where ZEO fits I can't tell you either, but it is just another form of
Storage which makes me think it goes well with ZODB, obviously. At the
moment it's a sibling of ZODB...
I'm sorry this is so vague, but it's an issue where someone needs to
make alot of decisions and then do a bunch of drudge work. Do you want
to come up with a proposal after moving some stuff around?
I just spoke with Jim and he's going to chime in a bit later on this...
Visit WikiCentral for the latest Zen:
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -