Hi,

The problem I have with 'MoreFieldsAndWidgets' is that it is
a collection of individual products, not just one product that
acts like a library.

For the better or worse: I imported ATExtensions just a few minutes
ago into plone.org/svn/archetypes

Of course I am aware that we have an even greater confusion now
when it comes to the question: I want to contribute a new field or
widget (or validator): how do I do that? Do I add this to AT,
to ATExtensions to MoreFieldsAndWidgets or do I make my own project?

What I could imagine is that we have ATExtensions and
MoreFieldsAndWidgets in parallel and maybe even somehow
synchronized so that people have both options if that
seems desirable.

I certainly don't think having things in two places will be helpful - people won't know where to go for updates, bug fixes or contributing, and things will end up out of sync very, very quickly.


I don't quite see the benefit of amalgamating a losely related set of fields and widgets into a single product. Usually, you only want one or two of them, and downloading a couple of products is not all that hard. Having a single "library" makes sense when its contents are closely related, either in approach, functionality, maturity, quality control or importance. Trying to make a "one size fits all" product is imitating the problem Archetypes itself has been amassing for some time. Modularising will make the whole collection much more managable, imho, especially if the quality and maturity of various components will vary within the library.

If there is a need for a single "libary", why not use svn bundles and tarballs thereof to collect a number of tried-and-tested products into a single download?

Martin

--
(muted)

_______________________________________________
Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )

Reply via email to