Fred Drake wrote:

On Friday 16 April 2004 01:31 pm, Michael Bernstein wrote:
 >  From a consistency in nomenclature POV, I find 'z' jars a bit with
 > ZConfig, zdaemon, ZEO, zLog, and ZODB, which one might expect to find
 > nested within 'z' (as 'z.Config' for example). This is admittedly only
 > an issue for the newest newbies still trying to guess at where stuff is
 > located.

I don't know what zLog is; presumably you mean zLOG?


zLOG is dead in Zope 2.8, and will remain only for API compatibility.

I don't think there's any real consistency now for what's in the Zope 2 head, so I don't think that's a big deal.

Shouldn't we strive for consistency in nomenclature going forward?

 > However, rather than suggest a wholesale moving and renaming of these
 > packages within 'z', I'd like to suggest an alternative short name for
 > the 'zope' package, 'OPE', which avoids this issue:
 >   import OPE.interface
 >   from import zapi
 >   from import publish
 >   from import ObjectModifiedEvent

Hehe. ;-)

(I do hope you're joking!)

About even considering a 'wholesale moving and renaming' yes, obviously, but as far as suggesting 'OPE' as an alternative to 'z' (insofar as it is still necessary to avoid a name-clash with 'Zope'), no. 'OPE' (as an acronym for Object Publishing Environment) seems like it fits better conceptually than 'z'.

Did I miss something? Did I just manage to embarrass myself? Is this a dream where I find I am wearing nothing but underwear in public and then wake up?

- Michael R. Bernstein
  Author of Zope Bible

Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists - )

Reply via email to