On 3/2/10 1:09 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote: > Hi there, > > > Chris McDonough suggests to ponder further structuring of the ZTK into > > separate sub-sets which might allow us to get better mileage regarding > > maintenance and release management. He gave the example of the > > "Bicycle Toolkit" (zope.component, zope.configuration, > > zope.interface). > > -1 > > We already have had issues with people changing things in ztk.cfg that > broke things in zopeapp.cfg, because they don't want to test it. If we > were to split things further, we'll see more breakage and more > integration issues as people won't bother to test even less.
I don't know who "people" are, and I don't know who "they" are, and I don't know who broke what. The reward is increased potential for reuse outside the various Zope framework stacks. It'd be a lot more palatable for people to see docs and a website for a notional "Zope Form Generation" package that it would be for them to need to extract such a thing from "the ZTK" wholesale. Splitting things across functional boundaries like this would put a more reasonable end-user face on zopey things I think. And maybe I wouldn't have to rewrite everything all the time due to people freaking out about things named "zope.*" if they were better organized into functional categories. - C _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
