Jim Fulton wrote:
On May 3, 2007, at 1:24 PM, Fred Drake wrote:
> On 5/3/07, Christian Theune <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Right. However, my suspicion would be that whoever makes a change
>> to the trunk on a satellite shouldn't have to go to the Zope 3
> That's true regardless of how the Zope 3 checkout references the
> satellite project's code.
>> Also, maintainers of the Zope 3 tree shouldn't have to read every
>> commit message to update the reference (doing so would be
>> pointless, that what not pinning the external is for).
> That's fine too. The maintainers of the Zope 3 tree simply need to
> decide how the externals in the tree need to be made. As I said,
> I don't care which they choose.
My advice to the maintainers of the Zope 3 tree is to:
1. in the long term, stop maintaining the tree and switch to a meta
project as Tres suggested. :)
2. depend on fixed versions, either by egg dependency or externals
with tags or revisions.
To update to newer versions, they don't need to follow each project's
commits. They could just periodically update to the newest version
and test. A variation on this is to update to newest versions
periodically and, for things that change, scan the changes. I expect
that, over time, most projects will change very infrequently.
Also, I would hope that when individual project releases are made,
that the releasers will do a reasonable job of updating change logs.
This should give consumers a high-level summary of changes that are
easier to consume than individual.
We will be using same Zope 3 resources for bug tracking, mailing list
and wiki for these satellite project's, is it ?
Zope3-dev mailing list