-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Raphael Ritz wrote: > Wichert Akkerman wrote: >> I seem to remember the plan was to target Plone 4 for CMF 2.2 and Zope >> 2.11, but as you can see below that does not appear to be possible. > > So that means Zope 2.12 instead, right? > > Do we have an estimate of what that implies on our side? > > Generally speaking, I'm a bit uncomfortable with jumping > from Zope 2.10.x to 2.12.x as this will reduce the chances > of reacting to deprecation warnings which is of particular > importance for all our add-on developers. I'm afraid we'll > see lots of broken add-ons without prior warnings. > > If there is nothing we can do about this (and it seems so) > we could still consider to have Plone 3.x move to Zope 2.11 > with 3.4 or 3.5. > > Just thinking out loud (and without knowing myself how much > differences there are between Zope 2.10 and 12 that do affect > us) ...
An outsider's take: I would strongly urge that a release-by-year-end Plone4 use Zope 2.12. There is no compelling technical reason to hold off, and plenty of time to test and iron out any issues. Staying up-to-date gets you a migration path to a Python version (2.6) which will be supported for a reasonable time frame (2.4 is effectively out of support now; 2.5 is at the end of its support life). It will also allow Plone to use the fully eggified Zope, and rip out lots of workarounds ("fake eggs", anyone). Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFKHaD0+gerLs4ltQ4RAphjAKCrWddVIMNgM1E9kLQfb8xe7lMdsgCgivEI QbaGWkFEAB44GxB43EN05hM= =goDC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team