On 24 Aug 2007, at 15:25 , Stephan Richter wrote:
On Thursday 23 August 2007 20:37, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
I would like to get your comments on it. No matter what this
I wouldn't mind eventually seeing it set in stone with your
so that the checkin police can use it as the highway code to issue
tickets to anyone who's speeding on the repository lane.
I don't like the section on coding style. A while back we agreed
can choose it freely as long as every package in the *namespace*
has the same
Hmm, I recall having discussed this on the list at some point. I
don't recall having reached an agreement. That could be me, though...
So for example, ``zope`` and ``z3c`` use the original Zope 3
styleguide, while ``zc`` uses PEP8 compliance.
So does this mean I'll can't put my stuff in the 'z3c' namespace if I
want to use PEP8 (which I do, not because of personal preference but
because of consistency)?
This is much easier to keep track of than having to remember every
I personally do not like underscore-style method naming, so I would
it for packages that I am starting from scratch.
This and other aspects are things I don't particularly love about
PEP8 either, but I value consistency over my personal preferences.
I do honor other people's
decisions though, and would always follow the original author's style.
Consistency is better than correctness in this case. (I usually
tend to value
correctness higher than consistency.)
Well, this may sound harsh, but I see some appeal in actually forcing
a particular coding-style on everybody. It's soo late for anything
that has been started already, but I don't see a reason why we simply
If you start a new project on svn.zope.org, it'll have to be in
The rule being behind this (as already mentioned above), that
consistency values higher than personal preferences.
Zope3-dev mailing list