Hey Martijn. These are good ideas. I also find myself importing a
package for some interfaces which sort of sucks too and which there were
perhaps a better solution for.
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Hi there,
> Roger Ineichen wrote:
>> Is someone willing to help doing that task?
> I'm very interested in this topic as well, especially from the
> perspective of Grok of course.
> There are many strategies to go ahead in doing this. I'll list just one
> observation I've had here.
> One observation is that the pattern of '.browser' subpackages tends to
> expand the dependency structure significantly. Often you want to use
> non-browser functionality and don't care about the UI that ships with
> .browser. At the same time .browser tends to add dependencies to the
> overall package.
> Other times (such as for zope.app.form.browser) the main reusable
> functionality of a package is actually almost completely in the .browser
> sub package. It might be nicer to flatten the namespace then and move
> things from .browser into the main package.
> It might therefore make sense to review packages one by one, and see
> whether zope.foo.browser can be factored out into a zope.fooui package
> or something like that. Of course the question remains how we can get
> from A to B without a major breakage in backwards compatibility then.
> Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
> ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
> (Related lists -
> http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -