Yusei TAHARA wrote:
> Hi,
> On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 09:37:33 +0200
> Martijn Faassen <faas...@startifact.com> wrote:
>> Perhaps one way to make the ZMI and optional package is to aggregate the 
>> relevant ZMI code into a smaller amount of packages (or a single 
>> package), for instance zmi.core. The benefit of doing that is that it 
>> should be possible to evolve the code slowly. You could still support 
>> the zope.app.* packages compatibility by putting imports from 
>> zope.app.something.browser to zmi.core.
> Then I'll take this way for now. Maybe z3c.zmi.core would be good?

Flat is better than nested (see the Zen of Python). I'd say go for 
"zmi.core"; z3c isn't necessary.



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