[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for "z" (was Re: Zope and zope)

[Jim Fulton]

Sidnei da Silva wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 11:46:27AM +0200, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> | >- The packages in "z" can be used for more than just Zope
> | 
> | +2
> 
> So, here's an idea:
> 
>  - Move component-architecture packages out of 'zope' into 'ca', and
>    then we don't have the 'zope' vs 'Zope' issue anymore.
> 
> I've been using stuff from 'zope' (except 'zope.app') for a win32 app *wink*.

Great

> So, what about this:
> 
> zope.component
> zope.interfaces (?)
> zope.configuration
> zope.testing
> zope.schema (soon-to-be-dead?)
> 
> - All move to 'ca.*'

Most of this has nothing to do with the component architecture.

"ca" has nothing to do with zope.

> zope.app.*
> 
> - Move down to 'zope'.

This doesn't solve name-conflict the problem. Or maybe I don't understand what you
are proposing.

> This is pretty rough. Probably there are more stuff that should move
> to 'ca', and some stuff which should be grouped into packages, so that
> 'zope' doesn't get excessively broad.

I think the depth vs breadth balence we have now is about right.

Jim

-- 
Jim Fulton           mailto:jim at zope.com       Python Powered!
CTO                  (540) 361-1714            http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation     http://www.zope.com       http://www.zope.org