On 5/3/10 12:34 , Martijn Faassen wrote: > Hi there, > > Hanno Schlichting wrote: >> I expect us to define the process around package releases and updating >> the ZTK. It's not entirely clear to me who should and who is allowed >> to update the ZTK definition. We'll figure things out and once we have >> I'll stick to the rules. > > My few cents: > > I think everybody should be allowed to update the ZTK definition. They > should follow certain guidelines (run tests, and such. Maybe updating a > changelog is a good idea too). Stability can be taken care of by > branching and tagging. I.e. the same guidelines as we have for other > pieces of code can be a good starting point. > > To get back to the discussion that caused the fork. We have implicit, > but I think widely understood and accepted, rules about backwards > compatibility. So we don't expect someone to rip out half the code of a > Python package just like that. Generally we expect the tests to continue > to run. Similarly we shouldn't just drop things from the ZTK without > special action (this involves removing tests too!). We started to try to > spell some of that out here long ago: > > http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/about/coreextra.html > > But I'd hate it if the ZTK trunk became some kind of bureaucratic maze, > as it'd stop me from getting work done.
I suggest that we wait impatiently for the ZTK steering committee to come up with a useful policy instead of trying to do their work when none of us volunteered for the task. Wichert. _______________________________________________ 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 )