Hi Tres,

Tres Seaver schrieb:

> For instance, if we provided for each mega-framework a single
> "everything {Grok,Zope2,Zope3ZMI} needs from the Zope framework"
> package, which named all the appropriate dependencies *and* provided the
> "shared" ZCML, and then switched each mega-framework and its
> applications to use that package, we could remove the ZCML from all the
> other packages (except for BBB).  In fact that single package would *be*
> the mega-framework at that point.

zcml contains many useful informations and I often use it as 
documentation how things fit together. It would be a loss to detach all 
zcml from the implementations into one/few big zcml packages.
Moving them into one dedicated zcml for every package leaves them 
logically related to the implementation.
It's also easier to maintain:

  - The zcml for an implementation has the same release cycle as the
  - Every relevant change in an implementation would need changes by a
    number of "zcml package maintainers" (Grok, Zope2, Zope3ZMI) that
    don't know the package nearly as good as the package maintainer.

I would prefer to find them inside the implementation packages where 
possible. Where it's intended to reduce dependencies a dedicated zcml 
package like zope.i18n_zcml is at least more clear.


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