-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Christian Zagrodnick wrote:
>> Nope. http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope3-dev/2007-August/023223.html
> Weird. At first glance I do not understand the context of that decision.
> There was a decision to "avoid deprecation" made by it doesn't seem to
> be motivated in the discussion:
> "- zope.app.component.interfaces then can import ISite from the new
> place to avoid deprectation."
> You're saying, I think, that we should do the same thing as in that
> discussion to avoid deprecation too. But I cannot find a reason to avoid
> deprecation in the original discussion. Could you elaborate on your
> I'm hoping to soon go through quite a few packages and deprecate lots of
> stuff by moving it into other packages to try to tidy up the dependency
> structure. If there are important arguments against deprecation warnings
> I'd like to understand the background.
One issue is that adding deprecation messages for importing symbols from
the old makes all "downstream" code add ugly BBB warts in order to
suppress them when run against multiple versions.
Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com
Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -