Re: RFC: Known working sets

Martin Aspeli wrote:
>  - It only works through buildout. Ideally it would be supported at the 
> setuptools level, imho.

I'm not really convinced that that's necessary. From a practical 
perspective, zc.buildout is the defacto deployment tool in the Zope 
community. Also, working sets have "deployment" written all over it. 
setuptools has little to no machinery to aid automated deployments in 
any way.

That said, Wichert's proposed solution to put the information in 
EGG-INFO would make it open for use by other deployment tools, even 
setuptools.

>  - I worry that the management of lots .cfg files could be cumbersome. 
> For Plone, we could probably generate one from the dist_plone package, 
> which otherwise lists "known working sets" for installers and 
> plone.recipe.plone.

Well, or the other way around: the installers could take the .cfg file 
of the working set and grab the right packages according to that. After 
all, a .cfg file can be read with ConfigParser quite easily.

>  - This doesn't really solve the dependency problem. I can't say, "Give 
> me Plone 3.0.1 or newer" in a third party package. That could probably 
> done by having a separate "Plone" meta-egg which uses >= type dependency 
> specifications, though.

Yes, this could be covered by a Plone egg (meta or not) and a 
"Plone>=3.0" modifier that's put in the 3rd party package's setup.py (I 
think the >=, <= operators can be valid in setup.py, just == isn't).


-- 
http://worldcookery.com -- Professional Zope documentation and training