2009/3/5 Benji York <benji@zope.com>:
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 6:36 PM, Tres Seaver <tseaver@palladion.com> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Baiju M wrote:
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Dan Korostelev <nadako@gmail.com> wrote:
2009/3/2 Tres Seaver <tseaver@palladion.com>:
>> -<include package="zope.file"/> > I believe people still use the ZCML "slug" files like the above. They certainly aren't related to 'zpkg'. The intent of the slugs was to allow for something like 'sites-available' / 'sites-enabled' (the pattern in a stock Debian Apache2 install).
I think it is particularly unfortunate to remove support for explicit, granular configuration at the same time as folks seem to be jumping to implicit (aka "majyk") tools.
Please revert this part of the change. I just reverted the change, however, I don't think that the "slug" files are useful anymore. I cannot see similar slugs in other packages either.
Agreed. I don't understand Tres's or Benji's point either; thanks to buildout we've left such slugs long behind us I thought. Typically people would symlink these into an old old installation of Zope 3 (or copy them over).
Explicit granular configuration isn't broken at all; if you want to explicitly include zope.file, you include its configure.zcml, not its "zope.file-configure.zcml".
Unless Tres comes back with some convincing explanation soon, please do get rid of this stuff.
Those files exist to allow for a use case we may have abandoned, which is allowing packages to be installed in such a way that a tool could help users enable / disable their configurations, without mutating something like 'site.zcml'. The folks who might have that usecase are those who package zope3 components for deployment outside buildout (as .deb / .rpm, etc.)
I don't know if there is such an audience; Benji also pointed out that he thought there were such folks.
I don't doubt there are still at least a few, but I also don't think we are supporting that use case very well moving forward. We just need to make an explicit decision to drop support, and then we can remove the slug files.
Can we have an "official desicion from The Steering Group" on that?
My initial reaction to Dan's removal was that the checkin message ("remove zpkg stuff") had nothing to do with that particular change: 'zpkg' was entirely separate from slugs.
Same here.
Well, I simply didn't mention the removal of zcml slug, I know that it's not related to zpkg. -- WBR, Dan Korostelev