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 > zope.security. +0 Seems reasonable to me. Hanno _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
