Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Benji York wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 7:23 PM, Hanno Schlichting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Log message for revision 92953:
>>>  Copied over the UtilityTerm and UtilityVocabulary implementation from 
>>> zope.app.component to avoid a dependency.
>> Instead of duplicating the code there should be a zope.utilityvocabulary
>> package that both zope.sendmail and zope.app.component can use.
> I agree in principal. In this case the code is extremely tiny, though.
> I'm not sure if packages which consist of only two simple classes are
> really that much of a good idea. There is an overhead in tracking
> dependencies and maintaining packages in itself. When the benefit of
> being able to reuse the same code outweighs this overhead is not clear
> to me.

If it's tiny, then the overhead is there only once, when the package is 
created and released, right? After than you can just leave it alone and 
never ever have to think about it again.

Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to