On 4/26/07, Christian Theune <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Is this agreed strategy once on is on the wall?

I'm not sure I understand you question.

I spoke briefly with Jim today about this issue, and he suggests that
for packages that really live within the Zope3 project, they need to
share version numbers with Zope3.  This imposes all sorts of overhead
on the various release managers for the different packages.  This
makes it very difficult to release the satellite projects in a
non-synchronized way.

For code that really lives in the "satellite" projects, the satellite
projects own the release cycle for that code, and control their own
version number.  For this reason, it's better to have the code live in
the satellite projects, and let the "giant checkout" use externals for
them if it needs to.

Since I expect the "giant checkout" to rapidly fall out of favor, I'm
all for moving code to the satellite projects.  Then "Zope 3" will be
free to become a swarm of nano-projects that can be assembled into
useful but also lean and maintainable applications.  Which is what we
really care about.


Fred L. Drake, Jr.    <fdrake at gmail.com>
"Chaos is the score upon which reality is written." --Henry Miller
Zope3-dev mailing list
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to