[Zope-dev] ZCML implementations: where should they go

[Dieter Maurer]

Martijn Faassen wrote at 2009-2-7 17:07 +0100:
> ...
>I personally don't like extras. I think the ideal situation would be if 
>packages had *no* extras at all (even test extras)

I do not follow your objections against "extra".

Each individual extra "XXXX:extra" is equivalent to a separate
package "XXXX_extra" depending on "XXXX" (and potentially many
other things). The extras are just a convenient way to avoid
cluttering the distribution namespace.

That said, I like a).

> as it complicates 
>reasoning about the dependency structure. I think with improved 
>structuring of the dependency graph, a package should have enough in its 
>implementation dependencies to implement its tests.

But then many packages are likely to depend on "zope.testing"
and maybe even "buildout". Would we really want such dependencies?



-- 
Dieter