On Wed, 2009-03-18 at 13:07 -0600, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Christian Theune wrote:
> > I remember that at the sprint we used to identify packages which are
> > "always good". E.g. zope.interface is a declared no-brainer to add to
> > your dependencies. The other two that keep popping up that we *might*
> > wanna white-list are zope.schema and zope.component.
> 
> To whitelist zope.component would be quite interesting.  As I recall, 
> there was a time when all packages that depended on zope.component were 
> required to be in the zope.app namespace.

Interesting, didn't know/remember that.

> I don't object to the idea, though.  We're using zope.schema and 
> zope.component almost like language features.

Same here. 

-- 
Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com
gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 7 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting and development

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
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 )

Reply via email to