On 8/19/06, Lennart Regebro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nothing. But when we have loads of empty top level packages that each
have a couple of modules it gets confusing, since you need to keep
track of what does which.
This is a perception problem, which indicates a documentation problem.
Each of the separate packages is in a top-level project in Subversion,
so worry about the top-level namespace a red herring. The issue is
that there are a lot of individual packages, and it's hard to keep
track of so many in your head at once if you haven't really used them.
An I'm guess no one has used *all* of the Zope 3 packages on
svn.zope.org at this point.
I would much more prefer if we could keep all small useful packages in
some sort of kommon namespace, which we know holds loads of small
useful packages. If this in unfeasible, then fine, I'll just have to
live with it.
I guess what I'm getting at is that it's not the top-level packages we
need to worry about, but the packages themselves. Those are what
offer interesting functionality that we want to consider for re-use in
Seems to me what we need is a way to easily find a list of what's
available, with concise human-readable descriptions of what each does.
There are a options to consider:
- The Python Package Index (PyPI) has framework categories. I thought
Jim had requested one for Zope 3, but I see only Paste and TurboGears
in the currently published list. We can get the appropriate category
added to PyPI and use that for browsing the available Zope 3 component
offerings. This would also make Zope 3 activity visible to the rest
of the Python community.
- There's a mostly-ignored Zope 3 wiki on dev.zope.org that could be
used more effectively. Adding a page to act as a catalog of what's
available is straightforward and keeps the barrier to entry low. This
doesn't offer the visibility or other features that PyPI offers,
Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at gmail.com>
"Every sin is the result of a collaboration." --Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Zope3-dev mailing list