Jim Fulton wrote:
> Then the question is whether the dependence of zope.app.zcmlfiles on
> zope.app.interface is needed. I'll look to see what that's about.
For the record, I'd be happy to see zope.app.interface and
zope.app.module gone from our dependencies.
zope.app.zcmlfiles too, but that's going to be a harder nut to crack, I
> I'd really like to get to something more flexible that
> zope.app.testing.functional, to make it simpler for applications to
> use only as much set up as they need. zope.app.testing.function was
> great in its time, but I think we can do better.
+1. It's keeping a lot of (testing) dependencies alive. In general it's
nice if a package's testing dependencies are equivalent to its normal
dependencies, i.e. (almost) no testing dependencies.
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -