[Zope-dev] naming Zope

[Chris McDonough]

On 4/11/09 4:39 PM, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Chris McDonough wrote:
>> On 4/11/09 9:40 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
>>> "Zope 4 is built using Zope Toolkit 1.0, as is Grok, repoze.cfg, and
>>> something else"
>> repoze.bfg is actually *not* build with the Zope Toolkit at least as "Zope
>> Toolkit" is defined by the Steering Group.  It uses only zope.component,
>> zope.interface, and zope.configuration, plus the dependencies thereof plus
>> zope.testing.  This works out to maybe 12 zope-related packages, while the Zope
>> Toolkit is, AFAICT, defined as "the set of packages that Zope 3 used to be,
>> versioned as a unit through time".
>
> The closest technical definition of packages in the Zope Toolkit is
> currently "what Zope2 (or Grok) needs of Zope 3, minus the stuff it
> shouldn't need, plus the general useful stuff".

Right.  That's what I meant to say. ;-)

> This comes down to a list of about 70 packages right now, where ideally
> it should be closer to 50 after some more dependency cleanup. The
> "general useful stuff" are things like zope.intid, zope.keyreference and
> zope.catalog if I remember Theuni's mail correctly.

That much dependency cleanup would be fantastic.

> ZDecoy, eh Zope 3 consisted of over 140 packages, so I do see a very
> clear difference between the two. That is not to say, repoze is based on
> the Zope Toolkit :)

Heh.  "Repoze" (unqualified with a suffix) is a whole separate thing; BFG 
obviously has its own naming issues.

- C