2010/3/12 Hanno Schlichting <ha...@hannosch.eu> > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Laurence Rowe <l...@lrowe.co.uk> wrote: > > On 12 March 2010 15:07, Hanno Schlichting <ha...@hannosch.eu> wrote: > >> Currently listed for Plone 4.x are things like: > > ... > >> - Well formed, valid XHTML (as a foundation for easier theming via xdv) > > That's really good to hear. Though I think "semantic HTML" or > "sensible ids/classes" to identify elements in pages is what I had in > mind with this point. Well besides the valid XHTML which is a > requirement for Chameleon as well. >
It's also likely that we'll transition to using HTML5 (the XHTML-compatible "phrasing", ie. HTML5, but close your tags), and Deco as a layout engine will be much happier if we do a revamp of the existing HTML structure. It's quite messy in parts from the 8+ years in production, and while it has held up well, it's time to adjust to how the web has evolved since then, especially with focus on our upcoming theming capabilities. Also, while on the subject of release management, it would be possible to split up these major new technologies in smaller releases, but we'd have to look at which things should land together. E.g. xdv and Deco should likely be in the same release —but don't *have* to — whereas Dexterity might be a requirement for tiles/blocks. (I'm inventing dependencies here, so no need to point out that any of these assumptions aren't correct ;) We could also take a page from how Firefox is looking to change their release management strategy, ie. landing stuff that has only infrastructural impact in a 4.x release (out-of-process plugins in FF's example, which will land in the 3.6 series, for Plone 4.x, it could be something like WSGI). Of course, that's what we're already doing, but pushing the less risky parts that were previously considered only for Plone 5 might be a good approach, and reduce risk. Landing too much at once in Plone 5 is definitely a real risk, as is a too-long release cycle for Plone 5. So evaluating each of the things we land in Plone 5 for possible inclusion in a future 4.x release is probably a good tactic. I'd love to see a shorter release cycle for Plone 5, but as usual, it's hard to determine, and I don't think the currently suggested estimates are unreasonable. I think an increased focus on "Tech Preview" releases (ie. what alpha used to mean :P ) could provide useful checkpoints for people to rally around when it comes to development. We shouldn't underestimate the power of self-imposed deadlines, I think it was used well in the Plone 4 release cycle, and even if Plone 5 is a release with a longer release cycle, we should try to do several checkpoints along the way to avoid landing too much at once, and get stuff out there for people to test in carefully managed projects, similar to what Jarn and others have been doing for Plone 4. -- Alexander Limi · http://limi.net
_______________________________________________ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
