Tim Hoffman wrote:
> I would like to chime in here on the zcml
Thanks for this balanced view which gives points that can be used to
support both sides in the discussion:
* today, the ZCML is very useful to understand how a package is supposed
to be put together. Removing the ZCML will make this harder.
* today, the ZCML pulls in too many dependencies that you don't really
need; you want to be able to supply your own configuration for
> This means the zcml is pretty important description of how the
> components are used in the broader context,
> it also means I think tests that are dependant on the zcml
> registration working is important,
> however the downside is the zcml does usually bring in things like
> browser views, which you may not want
> and so need to then gut some of the zml.
I'll note that our dependency refactoring project will hopefully allow
you to reuse more of a package's ZCML, as each package itself has a more
focused goal (and no UI).
It's my opinion that the dependency refactoring project is the most
important we have going on right now. Whether we should be pulling out
ZCML or not from these smaller packages will need a few experiments to
work out the full consequences of such a procedure.
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -