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

Reply via email to