Just my two cents:
Christopher's proposition is great, +1 from me
Christopher, I would be very pleased to see someone taking the lead on
I totally support you for being the official package maintainer for ZopeSkel.
Le 16 Jan 2010 à 09:48, Martin Aspeli a écrit :
> 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.
>> New Repository
> 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
ZopeSkel mailing list