On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Fabio Tranchitella <kob...@kobold.it> wrote:
> * 2010-03-03 21:44, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> The ZTK was created in part to deal with instability issues arising from
>> people working on parts without testing the whole.
> I suppose everybody here agrees that any change to a package which is part
> of the ZTK *must* be tested against the whole ZTK.
It would be great if that were true. If so, then the recent arguments
have been a terrible misunderstanding.
> It would be easier to
> find leading developers for subgroups of packages (eg. bicycle repair kit,
> rm generation, ...) willing to raise the quality of a specific subset of
> packages instead of finding a release manager willing to oversee > 60
> packages, which he does not really use (because I don't think we have a
> single developer using *all* of the packages in the ZTK).
> These specific leading developers could report and synchronize with a ZTK
> release manager, though.
There's nothing preventing people from doing this AFAICT. If someone
is interested in pursuing a change to a package or collection of
packages, they can do so with or without some organizational
structure. Problems would arise only if they proposed a backward
incompatible change, which isn't to say that backward-incompatible
changes are impossible.
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -