On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:57 AM, Chris McDonough <chr...@plope.com> wrote:
> It's a partial step towards getting rid of a dependency that zope.intid has on
> zope.container.  I'm thinking that maybe that IContained interface belongs in
> some other package (e.g. maybe zope.contained).  That Container base class 
> is..
> uh.. not complicated, so even if we never do get rid of the zope.container
> dependency completely, it really doesn't harm anything to not use Contained.
> Unless you have some nostalgia for it. ;-)

At the rate we're going, every class and every interface is going to
be in a separate package.

Keeping the dependency graph clean is great, and there's plenty to do
there. But there's also something to be said about being able to keep
a substantial portion of it in your head.  The cleanliness of the
graph isn't so important if most users still can't understand just
because there are so many pieces that they wouldn't normally use


Fred L. Drake, Jr.    <fdrake at gmail.com>
"Chaos is the score upon which reality is written." --Henry Miller
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