Marius Gedminas wrote:
> So either let's make zope.app.testing not depend on the whole world,
+1
> or
> let's extract the core of zope.app.testing
+10
> and put it somewhere else
> (zope.testing?).
-1
cheers,
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Fred Drake wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Malthe Borch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I didn't know there was a controversy, but I do remember that there was
>> consensus that ``extras_require`` is not the most elegant solution.
>
> Oh, ther
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Fred Drake wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Malthe Borch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I didn't know there was a controversy, but I do remember that there was
>> consensus that ``extras_require`` is not the most elegant solution.
>
> Oh, ther
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 11:59:24PM +0200, Malthe Borch wrote:
> Fred Drake wrote:
> > There's no good way to avoid dependencies like zope.app.testing;
> > because that's part of the test environment, the tests won't show
> > whether there are problems when it's removed. If you want to fly what
> >
Fred Drake wrote:
> There's no good way to avoid dependencies like zope.app.testing;
> because that's part of the test environment, the tests won't show
> whether there are problems when it's removed. If you want to fly what
> you test, test dependencies can't be eliminated.
I understand, but thi
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Malthe Borch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I didn't know there was a controversy, but I do remember that there was
> consensus that ``extras_require`` is not the most elegant solution.
Oh, there is!
> If you can advise a different way to avoid pulling in
> ``zope.a
Fred Drake wrote:
> This is a controversial change; can we avoid making changes like this
> until a policy is agreed upon?
>
> The controversy surrounding this has been discussed on zope-dev
> several times; I don't want to rehash it *right now*, since we all
> have things we need to get done.
I
