Cristopher Ewing wrote:
One of the outcomes of the ZopeSkel BBQ sprint was a set of proposals
regarding the future of the zopeskel project. Many of these proposals
are sweeping enough in their scope that those of us in attendance at the
sprint felt that the input of the community would be required before we
moved forward enacting any of them. I'd like to take this opportunity to
lay these proposals out in a public forum for discussion:
Thanks for following up!
Splitting ZopeSkel into Egg Packages
No-one imports from ZopeSkel so changing packages around is fine.
I don't think we should have the tendency to make walled gardens for
various packages. Dexterity, for instance, is in the Plone repository.
Lots of repositories becomes a management overhead and is one more place
people have to ask for access.
I think the Collective is fine. I don't think there's a problem with
people putting "junk" in ZopeSkel. Rather, I think there's a problem
that we don't have a dedicated maintainer who can arbitrate whether
things go in or out. That person *may* have to back out a change or two
if it was in the collective, but more likely people would just ask
before making changes. A line in the README that says "please make a
branch if you intend to make changes and discuss your changes on X
mailing list" normally works just fine.
I nominate Chris Ewing as that maintainer. :-p
Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book
ZopeSkel mailing list