On 29.07.13 13:22, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 8:44 PM, Christian Tismer wrote:
Yes, I understand this intention and see no problem:
Just the namespace might be ZODB.Btrees which would not change
the split. They would still live alone, separate projects.
This seems to be a c
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 8:44 PM, Christian Tismer wrote:
> Yes, I understand this intention and see no problem:
> Just the namespace might be ZODB.Btrees which would not change
> the split. They would still live alone, separate projects.
This seems to be a complete red herring. What difference do
Pretty sure this could be merged to zopefoundation project if anyone asked
Carlos.
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Adam GROSZER wrote:
> On 07/22/2013 01:27 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>
>>
>> - The biggest thing ZODB needs right now is documentation.
>>Unfortunately, this isn't easy. There is z
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:47 AM, Adam GROSZER wrote:
> On 07/22/2013 01:27 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>
>>
>> - The biggest thing ZODB needs right now is documentation.
>>Unfortunately, this isn't easy. There is zodb.org,
>>but much better documentation is needed.
>>
>
> There is
>
> https://g
On 07/22/2013 01:27 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
- The biggest thing ZODB needs right now is documentation.
Unfortunately, this isn't easy. There is zodb.org,
but much better documentation is needed.
There is
https://github.com/cguardia/ZODB-Documentation
but seems like it got stalled 5 month
Am 22.07.2013 13:27, schrieb Jim Fulton:
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Christian Tismer
wrote:
This is my last emission for tonight.
I would be using ZODB as a nice little package if it was one.
There should be nothing else but
ZODB.
Instead, there is
BTrees
persistent
On 22.07.13 18:01, Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/22/2013 09:15 AM, Stephan Richter wrote:
BTrees
I agree, this could be part of ZODB and it would be fine.
Splitting out BTrees was a conscious decision to serve two goals:
- - Allow evolving it (in part
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/22/2013 09:15 AM, Stephan Richter wrote:
>>> BTrees
> I agree, this could be part of ZODB and it would be fine.
Splitting out BTrees was a conscious decision to serve two goals:
- - Allow evolving it (in particular, the work to port it to Py3k
On 22.07.13 15:15, Stephan Richter wrote:
On Sunday, July 21, 2013 06:12:34 AM Christian Tismer wrote:
BTrees
I agree, this could be part of ZODB and it would be fine.
...
ZODB3 (zlibstorage)
Well, this package is deprecated. It is available for backward-compatibility.
Yes,
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Stephan Richter
wrote:
> On Sunday, July 21, 2013 06:12:34 AM Christian Tismer wrote:
...
>> ZConfig
>
> In my opinion this is a relic from the times before configparser existed.
IMO, ZConfig is very useful in some specific cases, especially ZODB and logging
On Sunday, July 21, 2013 06:12:34 AM Christian Tismer wrote:
> BTrees
I agree, this could be part of ZODB and it would be fine.
> persistent
> transaction
> zc.lockfile
> zdaemon
> zope.interface
These are all very useful outside the context of ZODB and I use them w
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Christian Tismer wrote:
> This is my last emission for tonight.
>
> I would be using ZODB as a nice little package if it was one.
>
> There should be nothing else but
>
> ZODB.
>
> Instead, there is
>
> BTrees
> persistent
> transaction
> zc.lo
This is my last emission for tonight.
I would be using ZODB as a nice little package if it was one.
There should be nothing else but
ZODB.
Instead, there is
BTrees
persistent
transaction
zc.lockfile
zc.zlibstorage
ZConfig
zdaemon
ZEO
ZODB
ZODB3 (z
13 matches
Mail list logo
