Re: [Zope3-dev] Release numbering
Hi, * Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050420 17:37]: I was hoping to stay out of this discussion, but ... 1. There will be many more releases of Zope 2, including 2-digit releases like 2.10, 2.11, etc. 2. The X in Zope 3X means that there is not yet support for Zope 2 transition. It's about setting expectations. I'm OK with dropping the X is someone else wants to manage this communication another way, but I'd rather not drop it. When we do finally have a story for transitioning Zope 2 apps to Zope 3: a) we will not renumber b) We don't know the nature of that transition support, so we should not worry now about whether it will clutter anything. 3. If I have anything to say about it, there will never be a Zope 4. :) 4. I'm OK with dropping the extra 3 in the release names. IMO either Zope X3.1.0 or Zope 3.0.1 are fine. I'm fine with either decision. I just still need a way of naming the security certified fork. :/ And that either doesn't include the name of the fork but it's own numbering scheme. Some may jump in and say don't fork. But it looks like that will happen. Eventually the certified version might just be a configuration switch. Anyway, doing the certified version likely won't work on the same branch as other people are putting features in. I need to have a point to only apply changes for getting it certified to. :/ So, unfortunately, Zope 3.1 CC or Certified Zope 3.1.1 might become reality. Eventually it also will only be Zope 3.1.5 (certified). Problem is: I have to state an (estimated) identifier within the certification documents to identify the target that we're certifying. I'll ask the reviewers when we have to fix that. Cheers, Christian -- Christian Theune - gocept gmbh co. kg - http://www.gocept.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] - phon: +49 3496 30 99 112 - fax: +49 3496 30 99 118 schalaunische strasse 6 - 06366 koethen - germany pgpEoUH9O1K52.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Release numbering
Martijn Faassen wrote: ... It is in our opinion that Zope 3.1 is more than ready for production use, which is why we decided to drop the X for experimental. We will also continue to work on making the transition between Zope 2 and Zope 3 as smooth as possible. As a first step, Zope 2.8 includes Zope 3 features in the form of Five. OK, I like this. Let's make it so. :) Let's drop the X and the extra 3 from the release and include this in the release notes and announcements. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Release numbering
On 4/20/05, Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: It just depends on how you count feature releases; for marketing reasons you might want to call a significant feature advance Zope 4. If Zope 4 means a total rewrite from scratch, then please noh. Fair enough. I certainly don't want to see another architectural change as big as Zope 3. Ah, come on. In ten years you'll both be all oh, this is just sooo wrong, I wish we could rewrite this from scratch! :-D -- Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo http://www.nuxeo.com/ CPS Content Management http://www.cps-project.org/ ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Release numbering
Martijn Faassen wrote: Hey Jim, I'm not pointing out inconsistencies in our message and expectations set for no reason; I think it's important to fix this aspect of our marketing. Please read the comments here in this light; I want to demonstrate how confused our message seems to be. Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: [snip] 2. The X in Zope 3X means that there is not yet support for Zope 2 transition. It's about setting expectations. But we're setting the expectation that one day there will be a version of Zope 3 that supports Zope 2. No. We are setting the expectation that we will provide a supported transition process. That *could* be backwward compatibility, but it might be much less. That's not the expectation that has been raised until quite recently, Huh? This is what I've always said. and since you're changing the expectation, I have limited control over expectations. I certainly haven't changed my message. I've always said that we will provide support for transitioning to Zope 3, being careful to say transition support rather than backward compatibility. We may only provide conversion tools. We may provide backward compatibility. I don't know. We won't know till we learn more. Of course, I've also said a likely strategy is to narrow the gap between Zope 2 and Zope 3. Of course, your Five work is a critical part of that. ... From an older roadmap document (found on Jeffrey Shell's weblog): * Zope X3 first. The X stands for experimental. It has no support for migration from Zope 2. Zope 2 will continue development for some time. Zope 2.7.0 alpha 1 was recently released. And there has been talk of a Zope 2 variation inside Zope Corp that incorporates some Zope 3 features that is expected to be released later this year. * Zope 3 (no X) later. This one will include support for Zope 2 products and content, probably through a conversion utility. While this is not an official statement, it is certainly consistent with the message I've given and stated above. When we released Zope X3.0, Stephan wrote: Zope X3 is the next major Zope release and has been written from scratch based on the latest software design patterns and the experiences of Zope 2. The X in the name stands for experimental, since this release does not try to provide any backward-compatibility to Zope 2. Yes The Zope wiki says this: Zope X3 is the first release of Zope3. The X signifies that it is not backwards compatible with Zope 2. A Zope 3 release with migration support will come later. See Zope3 for links, etc. Yes, still consistent. What are we implying here? We are implying what I said above and what all of these statements say. What do you find inconsistent? We've been telling the whole world that the X is there because there is no backwards compatibility for Zope 2, in the release notes for Zope X3.0 even. In this light, it's not unreasonable for people to expect that we will add this compatibility. We are careful to say that we will someday at least provide transition support. We may provide backward compatibility someday. We will if it is feasible to do so. We certainly aren't providing it now and we aren't even providing transition tools. The X in Zope 3 means that it's for new applications. You can't move your existing applications to it without substatially rewriting them. If you want to suggest different wording for this plan, I'm open to suggestions. People observing the project from a distance might rightfully start thinking things like this: This doesn't seem to make too much sense. Zope 3X is still far from being Zope 3. Schooltool has been developing a framework for more than a year now - and now you are going to rip out all that plumbing and rewrite it anyway for another platform that will probably also require a lot of rewrite as Zope 3x is a milestone to Zope 3. What was the hedge against? Why don't you rather use the time to make schooltool a world class app and migrate to Z3 later? http://lists.schooltool.org/pipermail/schooltool/2004-December/000883.html I agree that it is a missconception to assume that there will be a major change for Zope 3 developers when we drop the X. The Zope 3 platform will be fully backward compatibly with Zope X3. I can see that people might think that Zope X3 is a different platform, given the thoughts that we would restart numbering. Is this a realistic expectation? Stephan doesn't seem to think so, for one. I think it is reasonable. You are saying it's reasonable to set the expectation that there is a supported transition process right? Right I mean, you just said Zope 3 won't support Zope 2 necessarily, just that we are setting the expectation for a transition process. Yup In fact I've been involved in building such a transition process for about a year now, but it has nothing to do in my mind with the X in Zope X3. That's fine. In *my* mind, it is connected. Narrowing the gap between Z2 and Z3
Re: [Zope3-dev] Release numbering
On the naming, I agree with dropping the 3. The risk with dropping the X is that we might make people think there is now Zope2 backwards compatibility. But there is a risk with NOT dropping it as well. And that is that we don't know how the Zope2 compatibility will look or work, and some even suggest that we'll do it mostly by letting people gradually slip over by converting their apps. There is therefore some risk that Zope3 will stay Zope X3 for a very long time, and that the main backwards compatibility will be done by instead running Zope3 apps under Zope2. 8-o Will we then continue to claim that Zope 3 is experimental forever? I don't think that's a good idea either. As I see it, the job of guessing which of these two risk are greater is in the end up to Zope Corp. But personally, I think that if there are no actual outlook of getting Zope2 compatibility into Zope3 within a year, then the X should be dropped now. -- Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo http://www.nuxeo.com/ CPS Content Management http://www.cps-project.org/ ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] release numbering
On 4/20/05, Jake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, that sounds like a nightmare. So we might have X3.1, 3.0 being released at the same time? Talk about confusing to the outside world. Yeah, It's better to call it 3.1 and 2.10 in that case. -- Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo http://www.nuxeo.com/ CPS Content Management http://www.cps-project.org/ ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Release numbering
Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: [snip] [snip] I've always said that we will provide support for transitioning to Zope 3, being careful to say transition support rather than backward compatibility. And that's not what the Zope X3 release notes strongly imply, which is again, my point. The message has been received differently than you said it, and we're still sending out messages with bear very different interpretation. It's not a secret that many have been skeptical about backwards compatibility with Zope 2, but there's a reason for why we thought this was the plan. Let's go back to 2001 to a message by Shane Hathaway, which certainly looked official enough to me at the time (it was in response to an 'open letter'): http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2001-December/014313.html Q: What is Zope 3X? A: Zope 3X is Zope rebuilt from the ground up, applying the lessons learned from Zope 2 and CMF. Q: What is Zope 3? A: Zope 3 is Zope 3X plus compatibility with Zope 2 products. Q: Will Zope 3X be compatible with Zope 2 products? A: No. Q: Will Zope 3 be compatible with Zope 2 products? A: Yes. Q: Will Zope 3X support DTML? A: Probably not. Q: Will Zope 3 support DTML? A: Yes. Q: Will Zope 3X be compatible with CMF? A: No. Q: Will Zope 3 be compatible with CMF? A: Very likely, but a lot of the CMF ideas will be folded directly into Zope 3. You might not need CMF anymore. This is what settled in our mind as the plan. It may be where Stephan got this idea. It is still interfering with the message coming from Zope Corporation that it appears did undergo some shifts over time. [snip] We better have some clearer communication on this topic between Zope 3 core developers, Sorry, my mind control skills are lacking. ;) I thought we could communicate using natural languages and all that. :) I can't tell Stephan what to think. I guess I'd prefer that he support the party line, but heck, who said there was a party. Well, Stephan probably thought he *was* supporting the party line, which is why I'm suggesting you two have a little chat about this. as Stephan himself seems to distinguish between a still official public plan and his doubts it will be like that. At least, this is what I conclude from this statement earlier in this discussion: Yup. I wish he wouldn't say things like this, especially as the release manager. He got the idea somewhere, and I doubt this is his own official plan. This is why I'm trying to bring this issue out into the open. [snip] I greatly appreciate the assistence you and others have provided in helping to bring some of the benefits of Zope 3 to Zope 2. Thank you, and I understand this. My criticisms are perhaps annoying but intended to improve the process. [snip] Sorry, I can't figure out which this you mean in your sentance above. I didn't think I said this. Stephan said the following in the Zope X3 release notes: The X in the name stands for experimental, since this release not try to provide any backward-compatibility to Zope 2. [snip] The problem is that I can't predict the future. Maybe you think you can. I know Stephan does. ;) I think I can make educated guesses about the future, just like everybody else. [snip] Anyway, my message here is to get a bit clearer on the message. I've clearly gained a very different idea about what the X means than you do, and that's not for lack of observing the Zope 3 process. Let's get our marketing straightened out. I certainly want to be clear about what I say. The bottom line though is that we don't know. We will continue to support Zope 2 at least until we do know how the transition will work. [snip evolutionary scenario] That's an interesting scenario. In some ways Five is already starting to be like this, though full compatibility is still far off. Anyway, I think the best way to communicate this is not to explain it (as it is complicated), and not to give the impression we will get backwards compatibility, and not to detract from Zope 3 by adding in Xs that we may not drop for years (as this evolution will take years) and will have to explain all that time. After all, we said it meant experimental in 2004, and look how long it is to get rid of the message of 2001 about backwards compatibility -- 4 years later we're still not clear about it. You can make the dropping of the X a positive marketing event: It is in our opinion that Zope 3.1 is more than ready for production use, which is why we decided to drop the X for experimental. We will also continue to work on making the transition between Zope 2 and Zope 3 as smooth as possible. As a first step, Zope 2.8 includes Zope 3 features in the form of Five. Regards, Martijn ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Release numbering
Martijn Faassen wrote: [snip] This is what settled in our mind as the plan. It may be where Stephan got this idea. It is still interfering with the message coming from Zope Corporation that it appears did undergo some shifts over time. Whoah, that last sentence makes no sense, I mean something like: It is still interfering with the message coming from Zope Corporation, which does appear to have undergone some shifts over time. Regards, Martijn ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] release numbering
Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The only non-standard part left in the release name if we drop the double 3 is the X. The X is a bit of a bother and will get us into trouble anyway eventually if a Zope 3 proper is ever released, as I can't see how we'd avoid situations where we'd have to say: Zope 3.1 is actually Zope X3.4 + Zope 2 compatibility extensions 0.7, which sounds less than ideal. I personally wouldn't mind if we just dropped the X. Yes, IMHO it'd be simpler to rename Zope X3.4 to Zope 3.4, and when the real Zope-3-with-Zope-2-compatibility arrives, either call it 3.6 or whatever is the current numbering, if it makes sense to have it in the same branch (which I understand may not be the case), or simply go to Zope 4. Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) CTO, Director of RD +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] release numbering
IIRC, it was supposed to go: 2.7 - 2.8 - 2.9 - 3.0 (merge) X3.0 - X3.1 - 3.0 (merge) And that was the whole point of putting X in front of the 3, so you would know it was not really Zope 3.0, but X3. Jake -- http://www.ZopeZone.com Stephan Richter said: On Wednesday 20 April 2005 08:18, Florent Guillaume wrote: Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The only non-standard part left in the release name if we drop the double 3 is the X. The X is a bit of a bother and will get us into trouble anyway eventually if a Zope 3 proper is ever released, as I can't see how we'd avoid situations where we'd have to say: Zope 3.1 is actually Zope X3.4 + Zope 2 compatibility extensions 0.7, which sounds less than ideal. I personally wouldn't mind if we just dropped the X. Yes, IMHO it'd be simpler to rename Zope X3.4 to Zope 3.4, and when the real Zope-3-with-Zope-2-compatibility arrives, either call it 3.6 or whatever is the current numbering, if it makes sense to have it in the same branch (which I understand may not be the case), or simply go to Zope 4. My suspicion is that the Zope 2 code base will eventually become the Zope 3 code base as all Zope X3 pieces get merged into it via Five. Once we completely fade out the Zope 2 code, we can call it Zope 4. Here is why I am saying this: - I do not believe that there will be ever a Zope 2 compatibility layer in Zope X3. The other way around seems more pragmatic and is currently done in Five. - I do not want Zope X3 cluttered with old Zope 2 code plus glue. :-) Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/jake%40zopezone.com ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] release numbering
On Wednesday 20 April 2005 09:07, Jake wrote: 2.7 - 2.8 - 2.9 - 3.0 (merge) I think this will probably still happen. X3.0 - X3.1 - 3.0 (merge) I do not think this will happen. In fact, I am getting a strange feeling that we will have both, 3.x and X3.x, around for a long time, since some people want Zope 2 compatibility and others don't. I think that Zope 2 products just use too much of the internal Zope 2 API that they could ever work in a Zope 3 environment. And that was the whole point of putting X in front of the 3, so you would know it was not really Zope 3.0, but X3. Right, and I think this still holds. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] release numbering
Stephan Richter wrote: My suspicion is that the Zope 2 code base will eventually become the Zope 3 code base as all Zope X3 pieces get merged into it via Five. Once we completely fade out the Zope 2 code, we can call it Zope 4. +1 from me... So lets just call it Zope 3 for now... Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] release numbering
Well, that sounds like a nightmare. So we might have X3.1, 3.0 being released at the same time? Talk about confusing to the outside world. This needs some rethinking. Jake -- http://www.ZopeZone.com Stephan Richter said: On Wednesday 20 April 2005 09:07, Jake wrote: 2.7 - 2.8 - 2.9 - 3.0 (merge) I think this will probably still happen. X3.0 - X3.1 - 3.0 (merge) I do not think this will happen. In fact, I am getting a strange feeling that we will have both, 3.x and X3.x, around for a long time, since some people want Zope 2 compatibility and others don't. I think that Zope 2 products just use too much of the internal Zope 2 API that they could ever work in a Zope 3 environment. And that was the whole point of putting X in front of the 3, so you would know it was not really Zope 3.0, but X3. Right, and I think this still holds. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] release numbering
On Wednesday 20 April 2005 10:36, Jake wrote: I agree. Drop the X when X3 has 2X support in it. Something you and Chris do not address is how to call the version of Zope 3 that will not have Zope 2 support. I, for one, and probably many others still want to have *pure* Zope 3 releases without Zope 2 mixed in. So for that time period (until Zope 2 coded is gone) we need two names for Zope 3 anyways. Maybe the X will eventually evolve to represent pure (like X - no Zope 2 here). :-) Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Release numbering
I was hoping to stay out of this discussion, but ... 1. There will be many more releases of Zope 2, including 2-digit releases like 2.10, 2.11, etc. 2. The X in Zope 3X means that there is not yet support for Zope 2 transition. It's about setting expectations. I'm OK with dropping the X is someone else wants to manage this communication another way, but I'd rather not drop it. When we do finally have a story for transitioning Zope 2 apps to Zope 3: a) we will not renumber b) We don't know the nature of that transition support, so we should not worry now about whether it will clutter anything. 3. If I have anything to say about it, there will never be a Zope 4. :) 4. I'm OK with dropping the extra 3 in the release names. IMO either Zope X3.1.0 or Zope 3.0.1 are fine. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] release numbering
Hey, I think the most sane would be: Zope 2.8 - Zope 2.9 - Zope 2.x, for however many iterations it's necessary. Zope 2 will grow some Zope 3 forward compatibility with Five, but this depends on Five contributors. Right now, we're doing fairly well and we hope this keeps up. Zope X3.0 - Zope 3.1 - Zope 3.2 and so on, until we feel we want to declare a Zope 4.0. If you want to drop the X after 3.1 that's fine too, but I don't see a reason not to drop it now. The whole X3-3.0 is rather bizarre and confuses -- X3 is not a release name but a product name, but we have no real plans for a non-X 3 anyway..., but the mythical Zope 3 proper *is* the reason for having the 3 duplicated, as far as I can see. You need to communicate that the strategy changed, and that we won't have a Zope 3 ever that will offer Zope 2 backwards compatibility. We may want to supply some of that, but that should be a separate project, with its own release numbers. I'll call that project Six for now, as that's 2 times 3. :) It's probably better to correct this impression now than to wait indefinitely as: * people can prepare their migration strategy better, either by porting to Zope 3 straight or porting to Five first, and then later to Zope 3. Nobody will be waiting for magical components which will be offered by Six then, as that's complete vaporware now; there are no resources for it, nobody seems to really want to do it, etc. * we can drop the X and have a more sensible release naming pattern for Zope 3. * we have at least another strategy now and can point people to Five/Zope 2.8. Regards, Martijn ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
