Yusei TAHARA wrote:
> 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 -