* Jim Fulton j...@zope.com [2011-08-30 09:25]:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 2:23 AM, Wolfgang Schnerring w...@gocept.com wrote:
My understanding is that from a client's perspective these two are
equivalent: if you want the foo functionality for zope.component, you
have to depend on
* Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com [2011-08-30 03:51]:
On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 08:47 +0200, Wolfgang Schnerring wrote:
My interpretation of your suggestion is that maybe that zope.component
end up as what zope.registry is now. But I don't think preserving the
name zope.component for this small
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 09:15 +0200, Wolfgang Schnerring wrote:
* Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com [2011-08-30 03:51]:
On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 08:47 +0200, Wolfgang Schnerring wrote:
My interpretation of your suggestion is that maybe that zope.component
end up as what zope.registry is now. But
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 4:27 AM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
...
- zope.testing (for addCleanUp of the global registry in
z.c.globalregistry and other places)
This particular detail should simply be cleaned up by
moving these calls into tests module.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 09:22 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 4:27 AM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
...
- zope.testing (for addCleanUp of the global registry in
z.c.globalregistry and other places)
This particular detail should simply be cleaned up by
moving
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 09:22 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 4:27 AM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
...
- zope.testing (for addCleanUp of the global registry in
z.c.globalregistry and other
