[Framework-Team] Re: Re: Namespace organisation

Rocky Burt rocky at serverzen.com
Sun Apr 30 21:20:12 UTC 2006


On Sun, 2006-30-04 at 14:01 -0700, Rob Miller wrote:
> > And since Plone 3.0 is going to require at least zope 2.10 and cmf2,
> > being able to use Product-less products will work fine, so it will  
> > work
> > out no problem to use plone.* as the toplevel package (otherwise
> > Products.plone.* would have to be the toplevel package).
> 
> it's worth noting that it's possible already to use plone.* (or  
> anything else, for that matter) as a top-level package.  without Zope  
> 2.10 (or pythonproducts) you need to have something in the Products  
> directory to load the package, but there's no problem having this  
> product be just a stub that imports everything from some other  
> package living in $INSTANCE_HOME/lib/python.

Yes ... thats normally ok but falls through when you are dealing with
content types.  Content types have to be registered via a Products.*
namespace.  Also IIRC DirectoryView's (skin folders) have the same
problem.

- Rocky

-- 
Rocky Burt
ServerZen Software -- http://www.serverzen.com
News About The Server -- http://www.serverzen.net





More information about the Framework-Team mailing list