Tres Seaver wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>>> The ZTK no longer contains any
>>> zope.app packages with one exception.
>> I'm not sure I understand the details of what you did.
>> I think we should be careful to just remove the zope.app packages from 
>> the ZTK entirely. I.e. we should maintain the versions of the zope.app.* 
>> packages that were in Zope 3.4 (or at least the original Zope 3 tree) in 
>> the ZTK for the time being. Otherwise we make people's life rather 
>> difficult.
> zope.app packages are still out there, but no longer part of the ZTK
> after Hanno's work:  he has squished (or tricked others into doing it)
> all remaining dependencies within the ZTK packages on zope.app.*.  I'm
> +sys.maxint on this change.

I'm very aware of Hanno's efforts and I'm very happy with it, but a lot 
of people contributed to making this possible. The goal is a clean 
dependency tree, and "removing zope.app.*" is a sub-goal that a clean 
dependency tree makes possible.

> We can't be "making peoples' life difficult" by removing zope.app.* from
> the ZTK, because *nobody has shipped code* which depends on the ZTK per
> se.  Anybody with dependencies on those packages needs to extend their
> own configuration to include them.  Hanno has been doing *more* grenade
> smothering by helping finish zope.app eradication in Zope2, as well.
> CMF is nearly zope.app free (one remaining testing dependency).

We have tons of code that needs to upgrade to the ZTK, as the ZTK is 
derived from Zope 3. Zope 3 contained a lot of extra packages and we've 
been shipping code of the exploded Zope 3 for a while.

Take for instance upgrading an existing Grok-based app. While I'd like 
zope.app* to be removed as much as possible from those applications, 
we'll need to at least provide a compatibility set for a while.

My idea is to maintain versions of the zope.app.* packages that are 
known to work together and work with the zope.* packages for the time 
being. If we don't maintain a set of versions that work together, we 
risk breaking things.

It seems to be the route to least effort to do this maintenance in a 
special sub-category of the ZTK.

At present time I know the steering group certainly doesn't have 
consensus on removing zope.app.*. I know Jim for one was quite adamant 
that zope.app.* remain part of the ZTK for the time being (unfortunately 
one discussion that I neglected to record in the ZTK decisions 
document). We can't just go and throw these out without a clear decision.



Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to