Lennart Regebro wrote: > On 8/19/06, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> What's the problem with top level packages? > > Nothing. But when we have loads of empty top level packages that each > have a couple of modules it gets confusing, since you need to keep > track of what does which. > > Eggs solves it for installations, but not fore developers which find > and want to fix bugs. :-)
Again, like Fred said, this is a misconception. Eggs support a development mode [1]_ that registers a repository checkout as an egg. To setuptools, it's an egg, to you it's a checkout. ... _[1] http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/setuptools#development-mode > I would much more prefer if we could keep all small useful packages in > some sort of kommon namespace, which we know holds loads of small > useful packages. If this in unfeasible, then fine, I'll just have to > live with it. Fred already said this: it's not the amount of namespaces we have, it's the amount of packages and their metadata. I'm *strongly* suggesting we use the Cheesehop as much as we can. I think that the ZSCP proposal might help us create the necessary and useful metadata for packages, whether we need a custom website for that or not is questionable. Philipp _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
