Hi Roger, On Wednesday 25 April 2007 23:09:26 Roger Ineichen wrote: > > Subject: Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: WebDAV Future > > [...] > > > > zwebdavext.zopelocking, zwebdavext.zopefile - extensions > > > > This I like, but renaming zwebdavext -> zwebdavapp :-) This > > allows a clearer seperatation between the protocol components > > and the application components, which is what want now that I > > think about it. > > > > For example zwebdavext.zopefile isn't really an extension but > > more integration code for zwebdav and any application which > > uses zope.file. Then in the future I can hopefully get to > > work on zwebdav.dasl, zwebdav.acl etc. which are extensions > > to the protocol and hence should belong in zwebdav with more > > coresponding integration modules in zwebdavapp. > > Why this complex naming? I really like to see a namespace package > called z3c.webdav and use sub packages like: > > z3c.webdav.file > z3c.webdav.acl > > If this doesn't fit for distribution, buildout or eggs, > or other things I missed, why not: > > z3c.webdav > z3c.webdavfile > z3c.webdavacl > > But anyway that's up to you, I'm sure you will do it right and > I like your work anyway ;-) > > Sorry if I missed something, I didn't read all the full thread. I have playing with a few options over the last past few days including this option. z3c.webdav doesn't quite work the the fact that I want to support content / services from the z3c namespace, I would end up with package like z3c.webdav.z3cextfile, to distinush it say from z3c.webdav.zopefile. This doesn't quite sit right with me.
But I am not going to split up this namespace as I previously suggested, as I do take your point that it does get complex. Thanks for the input, Michael _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
