Hi Benji. I don't like the first option. I am already using a zope extras to group packages for other reasons and don't really want to mix this with the test extra. I am trying to use extras as much as possible opposed to listing reams of packages in buildout.cfg to keep it cleaner and simpler. I don't mind the strange name to be honest, the namespaces are informative. Many thanks.


Benji York wrote:
I have a small issue with zope.testbrowser packaging I'd like to get some input on. If I were to have started the project today, it would likely have been zc.testbrowser, which would have no Zope 3 dependencies (or functionality) and zc.testbrowser.zope, which would have, and depended on zc.testbrowser. Well, that didn't happen, but there are parallels to the current situation that might be informative.

There is a configuration bug in testbrowser that means that unless you include the "test" extra, you won't get the Zope 3 dependencies. I suspect most people either include that extra, or accidentally include the dependencies through other packages. I have two ideas for fixing this:

1) introduce a "zope" extra that everyone will have to use (basically just rename "test" to "zope";

2) take a lesson from the fictional zc.testbrowser and introduce another package (zope.testbrowser.zope) that contains the Zope 3 bits and depends on zope.testbrowser.

I think I prefer the second, despite it's strange appearance.  Thoughts?
Zope3-dev mailing list
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to