Tres Seaver wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> Interesting, and thanks for doing this. Concerning Grok, did you look at
>> Grok 1.0 or Grok 1.1?
> Just grok/trunk (I was trying to think about the "state of ZTK" in terms
> of how it was being used by latest-and-greatest versions of downstream
Okay, that should be approximately 1.1.
> and the following further packages say that they are marked as unused,
> according to the dependency checker:
> - - zope.app.appsetup
This is definitely being used. I figure it's a dependency through ZCML.
>> Of course we'll also need the other zope.app.* packages for a while
>> longer to provide backward compatibility imports and such for those
>> upgrading existing Grok apps.
> I'm assuming that BBB imports could be "soft" dependencies, and that
> developers who are upgrading from earlier Grok versions can adjust their
> own buildouts or package depenencies to pull the extras in without Grok
> needing to provide "convenience dependencies" -- am I right?
Yes. We'll likely have a grok-backwards package or something like that
that depends on the "lost" dependencies, so a developer can depend on
that with their project.
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -