On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 19:49:54 +0100, Rob Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

i'm +0 on including Z2.9 with the installers. it'd be great, but i don't know enough about the risks to formulate an informed opinion. however, i'm a big +1 on having a large number of add-on products require Z2.9. this will force anyone who wants to use the groovy new tools that are being built to upgrade. maybe we could have binary installers of each flavor, to help out those who'd want to upgrade but who only install from binaries.


This is a big pain in the ass, though. A lot of people want to stick with installers, especially if they're on Windows. Yes, it's not that hard, but even the fact that we say this is the "official" Plone installer counts for a lot. Also, you will invariably end up with some tangle where one product doesn't work reliably on 2.8 and the other doesn't work reliably on 2.9 and bot say they support 2.5.

Again - why have the added complexity?

And the larger point: Zope 2.8 will be unsupported (and thus won't get critical bug patches etc. unless someone steps up or pays) pretty soon after (before?) 2.5 ships, since 2.10 comes out.

Martin

--
(muted)

_______________________________________________
Framework-Team mailing list
Framework-Team@lists.plone.org
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team

Reply via email to