[Zope-dev] Request for review: z3c.recipe.i18n (branch: baijum-zcml-path)

[Baiju M]

On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 12:56 AM, Marius Gedminas <marius at gedmin.as> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 07, 2010 at 03:51:20PM +0530, Baiju M wrote:
>> Hi Roger,
>>               I have created a branch to add a small feature addition to
>> i18n recipe (z3c.recipe.i18n) here:
>> svn://svn.zope.org/repos/main/z3c.recipe.i18n/branches/baijum-zcml-path
>
> I'm not Roger, but I looked at
> http://zope3.pov.lt/trac/log/z3c.recipe.i18n/branches/baijum-zcml-path
> anyway.
>
>> Now the value of `zcml` option could be specified as a path to ZCML file.
>> The old behaviour, which was expecting a ZCML string is retained.
>
> I'm not sure it makes sense to me: if you make a mistake and your ZCML
> is not well-formed, it will be treated as a filename?  I don't think
>
>  IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '<include package="z3c.recipe.tests" file="extract.zcml" />"'
>
> is very friendly, and could lead the user on a wild-goose chase assuming
> that extract.zcml is somehow missing in the z3c.recipe.tests package
> (instead of noticing the stray " and removing it).
>
> I'd rather see an alternative option name
>
>  zcml-file = /path/name
>
>> Please let me know, if I can merge this branch to trunk and make a
>> new release.  Since this is feature addition, I will be giving
>> version number as 0.8.0.
>
> Incidentally, can you use
>
>  zcml = <include file="/absolute/path/name" />
>
> without specifying a package?  In other words, is this just syntactic
> sugar for something that's already possible, or a way to do something
> that wasn't possible before?

Thanks for the review!

I can use "file" option without specifying the package.
So, I am not going to merge my branch.

Regards,
Baiju M