[Zope-CMF] CMF vs. CMF.buildout

yuppie y.2010 at wcm-solutions.de
Thu Aug 5 11:30:04 EDT 2010


Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
> On 8/5/10 16:52 , yuppie wrote:
>> Charlie Clark wrote:
>>> I'm actively abstaining as while I understand the need to clean things up,
>>> I'm not sure I understand the whole context (my lack of understanding
>>> rather than any lack of explanation). CMF is actually empty, isn't it?
>>> Apart from the history that is.
>> And these files might still contain some useful information, but need to
>> be cleaned up:
>> - INSTALL.txt and INSTALL_SVN.txt
>> - README.txt
> Hi Yuppie,
> You do realize if you're trying to create one "supported" buildout for
> developers and end users there's a new support burden to shoulder.
> CMF.buildout was explicitly billed as a developer convenience. What's it
> going to be for a central CMF package?

What do you mean by "central CMF package"? svn.zope.org/CMF was never a 
real Python package. It was a container for all the CMF Products as well 
as for developer tools, developer documents and some end user documents. 
I think INSTALL.txt and README.txt could make the focus on developers 

I can't see any additional burden caused by the proposed change.



More information about the Zope-CMF mailing list