Dan Korostelev wrote: > 2009/3/11 Martijn Faassen <faas...@startifact.com>: >>> Oh, and on the topic, one more time: can we have a steering group >>> decision on the package requirements for zcml statements? Are we doing >>> extras for them or simply skipping them? >> Sorry, I wasn't clear that there was an open question and I'm afraid I >> don't understand this one. :) >> >> Could you point me to the appropriate thread that was left in the >> middle, or could you start a new thread with a description of the open >> question? > > I'm too lazy now to search in archives, so I'll just describe again. > For example, the zope.password package only requires zope.interface to > be functional. But it's configure.zcml contains directives that need > zope.component (or repoze.zcml) and zope.security. Also, the zcml > thing itself needs zope.configure as well. Should we mention it in > extra dependencies somehow or just document it, saying that zcml is > intented to be used in more zope3-ish environment that already has > needed packages, so others can simply ignore these files.
Good question. In packages where the *tests* load the ZCML, they will definitely need to be described as test extra dependencies at the least. In packages that don't load their own ZCML during the tests, it's harder to say. One reaction could be that this package doesn't have enough tests then! Of course another would argue that this is configuration information only that can be overridden, but it is rather special configuration... Opinions? Regards, Martijn _______________________________________________ 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 )
