[ZODB-Dev] Re: Python module namespace pollution

[John Belmonte]

Jim Fulton wrote:
> John Belmonte wrote:
> 
>> I noticed that 3.3a3 has added another generically-named module to the 
>> top level namespace.  Shouldn't the following really be under ZODB?
>>
>>     persistent
>>     transaction
>>     Persistence
>>
>> Before a stable release is made and it's too late, I think that 
>> "persistent" and "transaction" should be moved to the ZODB package.
> 
> The "transaction" package is indepenent of ZODB. The persistent package
> wants to be.

I don't see why they can't be placed into the ZODB package even if they 
have no dependencies on other modules in the package.  Nothing is 
stopping another persistence library, etc., from using them, it is just 
a question of having more installed than you need.

> We are contemplating using a package named "z" as a container package for
> packages developed as part of the Zope project. (If your're curious about
> why, see: http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/RenameTheZopePackage.)

In terms of top level namespace pollution, a one letter name is about as 
bad as it gets.

> How would y'all feel about:
> 
>   z.odb
>   z.transaction
>   z.persistent

What about BTrees?


-John


-- 
http:// if  ile.org/