On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 09:48:40 +0200
Martijn Faassen <faas...@startifact.com> wrote:

> Hey,
> Roger Ineichen wrote:
> > I think there is a little confusion about which package depends on
> > each other.
> > 
> > Right now there is a zmi.core package this package should
> > contain core parts without to much dependency.  After that
> > we need several zmi.* packages which are replacements for
> > each zope.app.* package. right?
> Right. Note that I'm against making too many zmi.* packages right now, 
> keep it all in a few packages now.
> Concerning dependencies, let's first talk about zope.container:
> zmi should depend on zope.container
> zope.app.container.browser should have backwards compatibility imports 
> from zmi, and zope.app.container should depend on zmi
> Now let's talk about a package that *hasn't* been factored away from 
> zope.app.* yet, such as zope.app.file:
> in this case, zmi would depend on zope.app.file but 
> zope.app.file.browser would depend on zmi. That's a circular dependency, 
> which we should break as soon as possible by moving zope.app.file's 
> content objects to zope.file or something like that.

I see, this is very clear.

BTW, what do you think of zope.app.form? As far as I know, it has some
basic interfaces like IInputWidget and IDisplayWidget, and they are used
by various packages. Then I don't see any reason to leave them under
zope.app.form. So, I think maybe we could also move them to zope.form or
somewhere generic package after we finish zmi package.

Best regards,
Yusei TAHARA <yu...@domen.cx>
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