On Oct 18, 2007, at 8:17 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
I may not *want* the other package's ZCML to be loaded: some of its
policies may not be appropriate for my application. I think that the
"library" vs. "pluggable application" distinction is valid here:
maybe
you want to define an entry point in the egg which a given
pluggable app
would use at startup time to configure all the plugins which exposed
that entry point.
This probably an indication that there are two (I know, that horrible
number) types of packages:
- packages which provide zcml sugar in the form of new directive
definitions
- packages which perform component registrations
It seems that packages which do only the former could be classified
as a "true" library while the latter is more application-y. It seems
like in a perfect world, libraries should not need any
configure.zcml, just a meta.zcml which contains little except meta
directives.
Personally I think it would be more useful to remove policy-laden
registrations from existing packages so they're more libraryish and
move these registrations into "site.zcml" (or an entry point moral
equivalent) than it would be to attempt to annoint the status quo as
the right thing by implementing dependency graph traversal.
- C
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
