[ZODB-Dev] RE: [Zope-Coders] revising layout of ZODB3 checkout

Barry Warsaw barry at zope.com
Fri Jan 9 10:11:46 EST 2004


On Fri, 2004-01-09 at 09:52, Jeremy Hylton wrote:

> Fred worried about the extra distutils cruft (and I would include
> test.py cruft) that is a little different in every project.  If we make
> ZODB3 and Zope3 use the same layout, I hope we can cut down on the
> amount of variation.  I would expect we could use most of the same
> tricks for the two packages if they both used a "src" directory.
> 
> Certainly, the Zope3 test.py works with an in-place build and a src
> directory.  We would need to sync Zope3 and ZODB3's test.py scripts to
> make sure they both handled it in the same way.

+1.  I think what Zope3 is doing here is very much on the right path. 
I'm adopting basically the same layout scheme for my Mailman3
experiment, including a similar setup.py and a nearly identical
test.py.  MM3 doesn't have compiled extension modules so it's less
likely to suffer similar pain, but the consistency and familiarity with
the Zope3 is a huge benefit.

It does mean that when I run it from the dev directory I have to hack
sys.path to put the src directory on it, but that seems like a small
price to pay.  Along those same lines, any "front-door" command-line
scripts need to do the same thing (and I count test.py as one of these
scripts).  My own solution is to have a paths.py script in my bin
directory which does the necessary path hacking.  IWBNI if some standard
convention evolved for this too.

Anyway to the extent that Zope3 and ZODB3 can be made consistent with
this emerging common convention, we should do it.

-Barry





More information about the ZODB-Dev mailing list