Martijn Faassen wrote:
> We've recently had some discussions on where to place the implementation
> of various ZCML directives. This post is to try to summarize the issue
> and analyze the options we have.
Thanks for summarizing this!
> We have several ways to go:
> a) continue with the current extra dependencies situation like in
> zope.component, and in fact clean up other packages that define ZCML to
> declare ZCML extra dependencies.
-1 from me. I see the test extra as a necessary evil to get us moving
with the lessened-dependency project. Multiple extras will just cause an
increasing number of combinations of packages which aren't tested
anymore. If you have a extra in your package, it should be possible to
move the added functionality from the extra into a package that depends
on the original package.
> b) pull out all ZCML implementations from where they are now and put
> them in special ZCML implementation packages. We could for instance have
> zcml.component, or zope.component_zcml, or zope.configuration.component.
> We had a bit of a side-tracked discussion about naming and namespace
> packages here.
> c) pull out only those ZCML implementations that cause extra
> dependencies beyond zope.configuration. So, we extract the bits of
> zope.component into a new package, but we don't extract bits from
+0 Seems reasonable to me.
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -