[ZODB-Dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Contents of Initial Data.fs in Zope Distribution?

[Shane Hathaway]

Jeff Rush wrote:
> I don't quite understand -- so there *are* root
> level elements specific to Zope that need to
> be copied into a Zope-over-ZEO environment?
> (hm, how do those elements get into a
> non-FileStorage Zope-over-ZEO environment?)
> 
> And do those elements interfere even a little in
> a non-Zope-just-ZEO environment?  The only way I
> can imagine, other than simplistic name clashes
> would be if a full iteration of such a ZODB would
> cause unghosting of objects lacking Zope .pyc
> and raise unnecessary exceptions.
> 
> I ask because I'm trying to decide whether two
> ZEO RPMs are needed re ZEO-wo-Zope-2.0-1.i386.rpm
> and ZEO-w-Zope-2.0-1.i386.rpm, or just one.
> Somewhat similar to how the Zope RPMs have
> separate ZServer and PCGI flavor packages.

Data.fs.in contains nothing but the examples folder, if I remember 
correctly.  Zope has no trouble starting without Data.fs.in.  Just 
ignore it. ;-)

Can we discuss the package separation, BTW?  It doesn't currently feel 
optimal.  There really shouldn't be a ZServer package, since ZServer is 
bound tightly with Zope2.  I would want to see the following packages:

ZODB3
ZEO2
Zope2
Zope2-pcgi

The both the Zope2 and ZEO2 packages should depend on the ZODB3 package 
and the system python package (which must be Python 2.1.x, not Python 
2.2.x).  The Zope2-pcgi package should depend on the Zope2 package.

Some suggested add-ons:

Zope2-CMF
Zope2-Plone
Zope2-Squishdot

Shane