[ZODB-Dev] make ZODB as small and compact as expected

[Christian Tismer]

On 29.07.13 13:22, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 8:44 PM, Christian Tismer <tismer at stackless.com> wrote:
>> Yes, I understand this intention and see no problem:
>> Just the namespace might be ZODB.Btrees which would not change
>> the split. They would still live alone, separate projects.
> This seems to be a complete red herring. What difference does the
> namespace make?
>
>      from BTrees.IIBTree import IITree
>
> or
>
>      from ZODB.BTrees.IIBTree import IITree
>
> That difference is completely insiginifant in all ways. But making
> that change would break all BTree usage in existence. I see no benefit
> in that change at all.
>
Interesting that nobody sees the problem.
If you are always living in Zope world, your claim is understandable ;-)

Here is the sketch of an example::

     from durus.btree import BTree
     from BTrees.IIBTree import IITree
     # ...
     # now transform the one into the other...

Here we have no problem because of two facts:

- durus is packaged well,
- BTrees luckily has the plural.

There are other packages floating around, and I just like to work
with many things installed together.

But I agree it would be a bit harder to move it. I was confused and thought
ZODB was already a namespace package.

So let's cook the herring and have it for dinner -- Chris

-- 
Christian Tismer             :^)   <mailto:tismer at stackless.com>
Software Consulting          :     Have a break! Take a ride on Python's
Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 121     :    *Starship* http://starship.python.net/
14482 Potsdam                :     PGP key -> http://pgp.uni-mainz.de
phone +49 173 24 18 776  fax +49 (30) 700143-0023
PGP 0x57F3BF04       9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619  305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04
       whom do you want to sponsor today?   http://www.stackless.com/