Dieter Maurer wrote:
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-1-30 18:50 +:
Brian Sutherland wrote:
zope.configuration.x
zope.configuration.y
Please don't, having namespace packages that contain files (as
zope.configuration already does) breaks setuptools.
Then setuptools needs fixing.
But not
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-2-6 12:31 +:
...
I would find is very unintuitive when configuration were centralized
(in subpackages of zope.configuration) rather than modular.
Configuration belongs to the application or framework component
that depends on this configuration not to
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-1-30 18:50 +:
Brian Sutherland wrote:
zope.configuration.x
zope.configuration.y
Please don't, having namespace packages that contain files (as
zope.configuration already does) breaks setuptools.
Then setuptools needs fixing.
But not for this purpose:
I
On Jan 30, 2009, at 1:48 PM, Brian Sutherland wrote:
Please don't, having namespace packages that contain files (as
zope.configuration already does) breaks setuptools.
zope.configuration isn't a namespace package. It is simply a package
with subpackages.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton
Zope
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 06:21:27AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Jan 30, 2009, at 1:48 PM, Brian Sutherland wrote:
Please don't, having namespace packages that contain files (as
zope.configuration already does) breaks setuptools.
zope.configuration isn't a namespace package. It is simply a
Fred Drake wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com
wrote:
I believe it'd be nicer to extract any ZCML related stuff from
zope.component at some point and put it into zope.componentzcml or
something like that. We could then decide to move the class and
Chris Withers wrote:
Fred Drake wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com
wrote:
I believe it'd be nicer to extract any ZCML related stuff from
zope.component at some point and put it into zope.componentzcml or
something like that. We could then decide
Martijn Faassen wrote:
This makes a lot more sense to me than having the ZCML support in
either zope.component or zope.security.
Indeed, surely all zcml stuff belongs in zope.configuration anyway?
No, not there either, as zope.configuration doesn't define *any*
directives except the basic
On Jan 30, 2009, at 6:59 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Fred Drake wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com
wrote:
I believe it'd be nicer to extract any ZCML related stuff from
zope.component at some point and put it into zope.componentzcml or
something
On Jan 30, 2009, at 12:01 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Chris Withers wrote:
Fred Drake wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com
wrote:
I believe it'd be nicer to extract any ZCML related stuff from
zope.component at some point and put it into
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 05:32:33PM +, Chris Withers wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
This makes a lot more sense to me than having the ZCML support in
either zope.component or zope.security.
Indeed, surely all zcml stuff belongs in zope.configuration anyway?
No, not there either, as
Brian Sutherland wrote:
zope.configuration.x
zope.configuration.y
Please don't, having namespace packages that contain files (as
zope.configuration already does) breaks setuptools.
Then setuptools needs fixing.
There's no reason why zope.configuration and zope.configuration.x
shouldn't
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Martijn Faassen
faas...@startifact.com wrote:
No, not there either, as zope.configuration doesn't define *any*
directives except the basic ones like 'include' and 'configure'. If you
would implement zope 3's directives in zope.configuration it'd start
pulling
Benji York wrote:
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Martijn Faassen
faas...@startifact.com wrote:
No, not there either, as zope.configuration doesn't define *any*
directives except the basic ones like 'include' and 'configure'. If you
would implement zope 3's directives in
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote:
Benji York wrote:
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Martijn Faassen
faas...@startifact.com wrote:
No, not there either, as zope.configuration doesn't define *any*
directives except the basic ones like 'include'
Hey,
Dan Korostelev wrote:
[snip]
What about the other use case of class, i.e. declaring implemented
interfaces, as in
class class=.foreignmodule.SomeClass
implements interface=.interfaces.ISomeInterface /
/class
+1. That's kinda strange to have it in zope.security.
I think, the
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote:
I believe it'd be nicer to extract any ZCML related stuff from
zope.component at some point and put it into zope.componentzcml or
something like that. We could then decide to move the class and
module directives in
Hi there,
In the dependency cleanup effort we've got going on at the Grok
cavesprint here at my house, we have moved code around some more.
zope.security was already defining ZCML directives so we've moved the
class directive from zope.app.component and and the module
directive from
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 06:42:58PM +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hi there,
In the dependency cleanup effort we've got going on at the Grok
cavesprint here at my house, we have moved code around some more.
zope.security was already defining ZCML directives so we've moved the
class
On Wednesday 28 January 2009, Marius Gedminas wrote:
Sounds good!
What about the other use case of class, i.e. declaring implemented
interfaces, as in
class class=.foreignmodule.SomeClass
implements interface=.interfaces.ISomeInterface /
/class
I was waiting for that comment. :-)
On Wednesday 28 January 2009, Dan Korostelev wrote:
I think, the better place to move zcml directives is zope.component,
as it already depends on zope.security for the zcml support and the
class directive also has component-related factory subdirective
which declared in zope.component.
Good
21 matches
Mail list logo
