[Zope-dev] ZTK Package Metadatas

[Justin Ryan]

Couple of follow-up notes..

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Justin Ryan
<justin.ryan at reliefgarden.org> wrote:
> Howdy..
>
> Recently, I worked with Tres to remove the funky old "$Id$" type lines
> from all the files in ZTK packages, and while touching every file in
> every package, roughly, I came up with some other thoughts on how to
> improve consistency, which are detailed in this launchpad bug:
>
>  https://bugs.launchpad.net/zopetoolkit-project/+bug/588782
>
> Today, I started by changing the setup.py for zope.browsermenu based
> on how zope.component is setup, and a Bzr branch is attached to this
> issue.
>

This was really sparked by, som

> As mentioned in this issue, I also noted that many packages have no
> categorization data.
>
> I originally, in followup to another issue where I changed all the
> zope3-dev emails to zope-dev, and started futzing with the
> categorization to change 'zope3' tag to 'zope', and remove the
> Framework :: Zope3 bit, which was discouraged by someone over IRC
> because other people's metadata is linked to this, so I abandoned
> those.
>
> I feel it's notable that this bug's original title focused on the
> general idea that package metadatas are inconsistent, and if there
> isn't already a policy, we should set some forth.  I notice some
> packages even note specific versions of Python, esp. zope.interface,
> maybe we should work on that in others.
>
> I'm sure people are like, "Oh, why so focused on all this fritzy
> stuff?",  but the thing is, touching each file in each package really
> helps me to gain familiarity with a system I've always wanted to be
> more of a contributor to, and am proud to have begun down the road
> for.
>
> As the Framework :: thing, does anyone object to two additions on top of Zope3:
>
>  Framework :: Zope Toolkit
>  Framework :: BlueBream
>

Obviously this would need some coordination with catalog-sig, and I
redacted my willingness to work with them this week after in the
course of 20 minutes or so of volunteering to help with PyPI issues I
was accused of trying to grift the PSF for funds and ten other things
because people can't count the number of ">" before each line of a
quoted message.

> I know the bluebream thing is wierd, I know there has been some tumult
> in the community lately, I don't know where all that really lies, or
> how it divides folks.  I do know that the BB brand has helped to have
> the first ever message I've seen asking basically, by someone who
> decided for sure they want to use Python, and worked a bit with Django
> which is very tasty the first day, apparently, and then found they
> wanted to use Zope techs.
>
> Anyway, just touching base.  What should the metadata reflect, etc..
>
> Most of all, does anyone mind my making sure that all packages pull in
> their doctests, if available, to display on the front page of pypi.
>

And of course, I know how Tres feels about doctests.  I agree, they
aren't the best docs (many packages like zope.annotation don't show
how to register zcml, just how to test the code), or the best tests,
having one that is both is better than neither of each, and even weak
doctests in pypi are often informative..

> Also, have we considered a zope.org site which just pulls all these
> doctests together, because obviously as PyPI is often down, and that
> needs to be fixed, we can also reduce our reliance upon it.
>
> If I want to know how a zope.* package works, i can always google its'
> name and get a PyPI page.  Howabout we try to supercede that with a
> documentation-only URL that links to a separate download location.
> And not count the visits against a Postgres database.
>
> Best!  Happy Zoping!
>
> Justin Alan Ryan
> [ bitmonk ]
>