[Zope3-dev] Putting pullparser and clientform where they belong (reverting 39890)

[Brian Sutherland]

On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 07:13:16AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Brian Sutherland wrote:
> > Since we are close to the release, I felt compelled to ask before I did
> > this. Could I revert 39890 [1] for the 3.2 release?
> 
> No.

Ok, good thing I asked first then;) I'll work around it or wait.

> Why wait until we are close to the release?

Because I only realized it was causing a headache for me yesterday.

> > It seems that phillip finished zpkg's module support some time ago [2].
> > 
> > (I ask as this is causing me headaches doing the Debian packaging for
> > the latest zope3)
> 
> The first beta was nearly 2 months ago.  We are trying to do timed releases
> and we've already missed the deadline.  I'm not willing to delay 3.2 final
> for this.
> 
> I am willing to consider a 3.2.1 release for this *after* the final.

That would also be fine.

> Why do you think you need to do this?

It is related to the debian packaging of zope 3. It is common practice
with these packages to remove modules that can be provided by other
debian packages. So far this has been the case only with pytz and docutils.

The relevant code in the debian rules file is (yes, I know it is nasty,
but there doesn't seem to be a "right way"):

    zbase    = Zope-3.2.0b2

    <snip>

    unpack: unpack-stamp
    unpack-stamp:
            tar xfz $(zbase).tgz
            mv $(zbase) z
            # Remove docutils and pytz modules packaged in separate packages
            rm -rf z/Dependencies/docutils*
            rm -rf z/Dependencies/pytz*

I also need to do the same with mechanize and it's dependencies. Since
the latest version of mechanize depends on pullparser 0.0.7, I also need
to remove pullparser. This is more difficult with the way pullparser
is tied into zope today.

-- 
Brian Sutherland

Metropolis - "it's the first movie with a robot. And she's a woman.
              And she's EVIL!!"