[zpkg] SVN: zpkgtools/trunk/doc/ - move remaining open issue to the to-do list

[Fred L. Drake, Jr.]

Log message for revision 38536:
  - move remaining open issue to the to-do list
  - remove content-free heading
  

Changed:
  U   zpkgtools/trunk/doc/TODO.txt
  U   zpkgtools/trunk/doc/collections.txt

-=-
Modified: zpkgtools/trunk/doc/TODO.txt
===================================================================
--- zpkgtools/trunk/doc/TODO.txt	2005-09-20 15:11:39 UTC (rev 38535)
+++ zpkgtools/trunk/doc/TODO.txt	2005-09-20 15:33:43 UTC (rev 38536)
@@ -20,6 +20,12 @@
     when building an "application" distribution since that has some
     support to select from different available Python interpreters.)
 
+  - We're currently only supporting a limited amount of "package
+    information" for collections, but this is largely a software
+    issue, not a design problem.  The information file is called
+    `SETUP.cfg`, and what's accepted is a subset of what's allowed for
+    a Python package.
+
   - Re-visit the abstractions for parsed revision control URLs:
 
     - The current abstraction is pretty painful to work with, and

Modified: zpkgtools/trunk/doc/collections.txt
===================================================================
--- zpkgtools/trunk/doc/collections.txt	2005-09-20 15:11:39 UTC (rev 38535)
+++ zpkgtools/trunk/doc/collections.txt	2005-09-20 15:33:43 UTC (rev 38536)
@@ -2,9 +2,6 @@
 Collection Distributions
 ========================
 
-Overview
---------
-
 Collection distributions contain one or more other distributions and
 the necessary support for installing all of the contained
 distributions.  The |zpkg|_ utility can build collection
@@ -93,31 +90,4 @@
 build with |zpkg|_.
 
 
-Issues
-------
-
-The following issues are known to exist with the current structure of
-a collection distribution:
-
-- In theory, the namespaces for different types of resources are
-  separate, so collections and packages with the same name should be
-  able to coexist.  This directory structure doesn't distinguish
-  between them, so that remains theory.  The only case we currently
-  need to deal with like this is ZODB: there is a Python package named
-  ``ZODB``, and there's a collection that contains that and a handful
-  of other packages that are normally distributed as part of a
-  separate ZODB distribution (``ZEO``, ``zLOG``, ``ZConfig``, and a
-  few others).  Given this limitation, the collection would need to
-  have a different name (``ZODB3`` comes to mind).
-
-  This isn't enough of a problem to worry about at this point; we just
-  need to keep this in mind when naming components.
-
-- We're currently only supporting a limited amount of "package
-  information" for collections, but this is largely a software issue,
-  not a design problem.  The information file is called `SETUP.cfg`,
-  and what's accepted is a subset of what's allowed for a Python
-  package.
-
-
 .. include:: links.rst