On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 09:31 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 07:15:04PM -0300, Gustavo Noronha wrote: > > This is the thing that replaces python-dispatch (ruledispatch source > > package), by the way. You may want to get rid of that one soonish > > (as in, ASAP). > > Thanks for the heads up. I noticed that there was some overlapping, > but I wasn't sure that PEAK rules completely replaces dispatch. Once > I've the package ready, do you know where/what I should test to ensure > the replacement is completely functional?
Well, it's by no means a drop-in replacement. PEAK is (along with zope) one of the reasons I got really dismayed at where TG was going - it's enterprisy stuff that reminds me too much of Java, breaks every possible rule for the sake of checking a checkbox (in this case 'see? we have namespaces'). Back to being practical, excuse my rant, peak rules is completely incompatible, but the stuff has already been ported, so as long as nothing rdepends on python-dispatch, it is safe to remove it. It's quite old code. The same goes for python-protocols, I think. I believe PEAK has renamed/replaced it too. See you, -- Gustavo Noronha <k...@debian.org> Debian Project -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
