Hash: SHA1

Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Hi there,
> Stephan Richter wrote:
> [snip]
>>> In my opinion going for an extra here just to avoid this is speculating
>>> a bit too much right now. Do we really have users that want to use
>>> zope.password and really don't want zope.component and zope.schema? If
>>> so, we'll hear from them when they speak up and *then* declare an extra
>>> or take some other action.
>> +1. I want more of our decisions to go into this direction. It is a sign 
>> that 
>> we turn the # of packages knob as well.
> I agree with you in the case against extras.
> It appears though that Dan has a concrete use case for using 
> zope.password in a Pylons app where he isn't interested in 
> zope.component, so I'm +1 on the extra in this case. We'll see whether 
> this leads to difficulties. Luckily the zope.component and zope.schema 
> libraries are typically around anyway so it doesn't make reasoning about 
> the graph that much harder.
> I'm just glad we actually had a quick discussion about this stuff, with 
> some form of conclusion.
> On creating new packages, I think we're in a phase where we cannot avoid 
> creating new packages for a bit. Before long I hope that this generation 
> of more packages can allow us to seriously weed in the packages in the 
> framework. Zope 3 + ZMI will need a lot more packages for a while, but 
> anything that doesn't need the ZMI (Grok, Zope 2) will hopefully use a 
> lot less. In addition I hope more of our packages will be reusable 
> independently as a result.

We should be trying to get all zope.app.* dependencies out of the Zope2
graph ASAP (before 2.12 final would be ideal).

> I hope that some group will start to take care of Zope 3 and perhaps 
> consolidate a lot of ZMI code into one or more zmi.* packages eventually 
> too.
> Besides the reusability argument and weeding argument for more packages, 
> I'll also note that if the amount of packages in the framework goes up 
> but the total amount of *code* in the framework goes down significantly 
> and each package is easier to understand, I'm happy to see the amount of 
> packages go up.

=lots.  Smaller, easier to comprehent packages should be a major goal.

- --
Tres Seaver          +1 540-429-0999          tsea...@palladion.com
Palladion Software   "Excellence by Design"    http://palladion.com
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

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