[Grok-dev] Re: grokcore.view feedback
Godefroid Chapelle
gotcha at bubblenet.be
Sun Jul 20 06:38:59 EDT 2008
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> Godefroid Chapelle wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> I planned to propose to move Forms in a separate package
>>> ('grokcore.formlib' ?) to avoid unneeded dependencies.
>>>
>>> And similarly, to move viewlets to 'grokcore.viewlets'.
>>
>> Sure, I think that's reasonable (the names as well). Factoring out the
>> form bits from grokcore.view into grokcore.formlib sounds like a good
>> idea.
>>
>> grokcore.viewlets will likely end up depending on grokcore.view for
>> the template infrastructure and such, so one can debate whether the
>> split is very useful, but it won't hurt either.
>
> Please let's name the package grokcore.viewlet, not only because it's in
> analogy to zope.viewlet but also because package and module names should
> always be singular (see PEP8).
Definitely, that was an oversight on my side.
>> Soon nothing will be left in Grok at all anymore. :)
>
> Well, Grok is much about gluing things together and providing policy...
> I think that's still going to be true...
--
Godefroid Chapelle (aka __gotcha) http://bubblenet.be
More information about the Grok-dev
mailing list