Hi. On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Christophe Combelles <ccomb@free.fr> wrote:
I believe packages such as z3c.form, z3c.macro, z3c.template, z3c.pagelet (and many others) are among the most important packages. I wonder why they are not included in the ZTK? I always end up using them, I believe they should even be part of the core ZTK.
We have written down some definition of what constitues a core library at http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/about/coreextra.html. That document is outdated to some degree, and likely the "steering group" should now be replaced by the "release team". Nevertheless the criteria given in that document are still sensible in my opinion. z3c.form might at some point become part of the ZTK. But right now none of the major projects includes it in its core. The other z3c libraries you mention, I have never heard of or wouldn't know what they did. They sound to me related to a specific way of constructing user interface related code. I think there's many different approaches to that and only very few can claim to be used by multiple of the major projects.
If they are not part of the core, I would like them to be part of a *community.cfg* list. There already is a community.cfg list in BlueBream, but I don't like having many foobartoolkit in the wild, with many package lists to maintain. It's already difficult enough to maintain just 1 list for the zopetoolkit. Let's focus on it.
What you are describing is similar to the idea of the "extra" concept we have defined for the ZTK. It has at this stage no manifestation in any code, version list or process around it. At this stage I would prefer to focus on the ZTK as a least-common-denominator of the major projects. And only if we are actually able to agree on such a set, should we try to extend it. This is going to be hard enough and extending the set of packages won't make it any easier. That doesn't mean you shouldn't go forward with your idea. I just like to have it separate from the ZTK. Hanno