On 2/13/06, Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Monday 13 February 2006 07:57, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: > > Yet again looking for comments, this time at: > > http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/OneNamespaceForZCML. > > -1 > > Here some comments: > > - You do not argue how the decision-making process is "highly inconsistent". > > - I do not understand what's so bad about coming up with your 3rd-party ZCML > directives. They are extremely easy to write and use. I think that 3rd-party > ZCML directives are not a bad thing. And yes, I would like to keep those in a > separate namespace.
I am also -1. But I take issue with your second statement. ZCML directives are the hardest and scariest code in Zope 3 to understand. It was easier to figure out what was going on with multi-adapter lookup than to figure out how menuItems work! (I lost a day trying to figure out if I could just put a javascript condition on a menu item before coming up with a glorious trick). I still HATE magical ZCML. But I still think ZCML is a good thing and should be modularized. Simplified - yes. Modular (namespaces) - yes. _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
