Previously Martijn Faassen wrote:
> 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.


I'ld rather not see a whole slew of extra packagse appear. I also wonder
how the extra number of packages and increasing size of sys.path
influence performance and restrictions on environments like GAE.

> 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.


It solves the problem in a consistent way

> 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 


This introduces inconsistencies that might be confusing.


Wichert Akkerman <>    It is simple to make things.                   It is hard to make things simple.
Zope-Dev maillist  -
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - )

Reply via email to