-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Fred Drake wrote:
> On 7/1/05, Jens Vagelpohl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>That just has the disadvantage that you're increasing the number of
>>configuration files to maintain in an instance. If it's imported and
>>used in zope.conf at leaast there's just one file to deal with...
> This is true. Is that really important, though?
> Adding this ability would be a new feature, so not available until
While that is the "correct" policy, I would argue that a
fully-backward-compatible extension like this would be a sensible
extension, at least until we establish a track record with the new
"time-based" release policy.
If necessary, we could implement it in the same way that Five did for
Zope 2.7, by creating a product which does a controlled monkey-patch for
the 2.8 (or even 2.7) releases, and then incorporating that product,
minus the monkey patch, for 2.9.
> I got the impression people want to do this now. It makes a lot
> more sense to pick something that can be used both now and into the
> future than hack something together.
> If someone wants to create a way to manage product-specific
> configurations in a single file, it's not hard to create a Python
> package to support that, and products that want to have their
> configuration placed in that file could set themselves up to use
> %import in that file.
> I've no need of that myself, but others are certainly welcome to
> create such a package; it may be a reasonable addition for 2.9, and
> could be distributed separately for use with 2.7/2.8.
Ah, yes, I should read the whole message first. ;)
+1 for the "product-includes/*" directory notion, by the way.
Tres Seaver +1 202-558-7113 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -