Re: [Pyblosxom-devel] Circular dependency mess

[will kahn-g. <wi...@bl...>]

This is an easy fix--you just move the import for plugin_utils until
where it's needed.

Generally, tools should be a leaf module--it shouldn't be importing
anything else in PyBlosxom.  However the run_callbacks situation breaks
that.

At some point, I want to relocate the callback stuff, but that's outside
the scope of 1.5.

Are you seeing other circular dependency issues other than this one?


On 04/05/2011 09:37 AM, Neil Santos wrote:
> Been looking at liberally sprinkling logging support to a bunch of
> modules.  Now, wanting to start out nice and easy, I decided to start
> with plugin_utils.py.
> 
> Except tools.py import plugin_utils.py, and trying to use the logging
> facilities in the latter causes Python to call me names and question my
> lineage.  And I don't like it when programming languages do that to
> me. :P
> 
> I've this notion of further breaking down various modules, to try and
> get pyblosxom to the point that it's at least possible to include
> logging in the various modules without circular dependencies causing me
> to tear my hair out in sizable chunks.
> 
> I'm not sure how attached anyone is to the current structure, so I'm
> announcing my intention of doing so beforehand (to give way to
> objections and such).
> 
> This is, of course, a non-trivial change, hence this message.  I feel
> that this ought to be done before 1.5 is pushed out (with proper
> deprecation messages and such where appropriate, of course), though I
> wouldn't be suprised if this stretches far into 1.6, as I haven't really
> taken a very close look at how big a job it is.
> 
> I can probably post an update here if anyone's curious.
> 
> If there are no objections, I'll proceed to chopping up pyblosxom
> modules.  To start with, I want to move logging-related functions into
> its own module, as well as other, more minor, attendant changes: i.e.,
> deprecated_function() will need to relocated, or at least, I'd have to
> figure out how not to invoke Python's wrath at yet another breach of
> circular dependency conduct.
> 
> Let me know what you guys think.