Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> On 12/29/09 16:23 , Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>>   >  but I do not think it is fair
>>   >  to shift that responsibility to others by forcing zope.app.* into the
>>   >  ZTK.
>> That's not what happened. What just happened that the responsibility was
>> *forced out* of the ZTK. I'm all for taking away responsibility from the
>> ZTK, but not just like that.
> I read this as 'the ZTK and Zope 3 are the same thing'. Is that what you 
> are trying to say?

No. I've argued strenuously against that notion in the past, in fact.

I agree with the general idea of making the ZTK something much like the 
currently proposed set. I just don't like the execution. Like it or not, 
we can't just drop obligations to backwards compatibility just like 
that, and we should manage these responsibilities in common as much as 
we can. And then if we can responsibly lose these responsibilities, by 
all means.



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