good idea, just some update what allready happen when
you where in China ;-)
> I see a few packages lurking in svn.zope.org that I can't
> make much sense of:
> * For example, what is zope.generic? I can't find a
> README.txt anywhere in the top-level directories. What I
> *can* see is that it seems to be another big bag for
> subpackages like zope.app. I thought we were getting rid of
> those? I'm also wondering why it carries the 'zope' top-level
> namespaces. Judging from the checkins, it seems to be a
> Dominik + Roger project. Last but not least there's the name
> "generic" that I can't make much sense of...
If you take a closer look at this package and you will see that each
subpackage is well documented. The generic package collection
is/was developed/mentained by Dominik. The zope.generic sub-package are very
well layered and have clear dependency that's the reason why they
are containd in a collection package. I'm not fimilar with the
state of the 'generic' project right now. But it's a really
> * For example, what does the 'z3c' namespace package stand
> for? Who's behind this stuff? And why does it sometimes use
> 'sandbox' or 'Sandbox'
> instead of or in parallel of 'trunk' for its main development branch?
The z3c top level package is a namespace for additional packages
where I and Bernd started to use at the SwissEasterSprint.
We like to provide usefull implementations there, which are
useable for Zope3. The packages in the z3c namespace should
follow the ZSCP proposal that's the reason why we started to
use the zope repository.
Please take also a closer look at the ZSCP concept
where we implemented based on Stephans work at the sprint
btw, this application is ready to use, perhaps it needs some
adapter refactoring migration work.
> * For example, is ldapauth still maintained? Is it
> bitrotting? Can it go away?
> So, there you have typical cases of three problems I
> currently see with stuff in svn.zope.org:
> * Uncontrolled package proliferation w/o consistent naming
> * Inconsistent use of subversion conventions
> * Undocumented packages (no package metadata available)
> Basically, what I'm really asking is:
> - Do other people also think it'd be a good idea to come up
> with some repository guidelines? Stephan had a proposal about
> specifying package metadata and code maturity/quality, I
> think it's worth working towards easily accessible info like
> that. If others agree, then let's get started.
Not started, just make progress in what allready started with
Stephans proposal and the ZSCP implementation ;-)
Yes, I agree
Perhaps you can check the proposal and see what we did in
http://svn.zope.org/zf.zscp/. I guess there is more to implement
but right now it's working and very professional looking.
Thanks to Kamal Gill for the great desing work!
> - Should this be part of the Zope Foundation development
> process (which again seems to be worked out by the Zope
> Management Organization)? If so, I'll hereby volunteer to
> join such a committee and contribute my ideas (especially on
> package organization in the repository and the associated
> development process).
I really hope that we adapt the prosess described in Stephans
Whould be cool if we could make progress on what Stephan started
with the proposal and your ideas.
Zope3-dev mailing list