RE: [Framework-Team] Re: Re: Zope versions
With regards to the installers. I can tell you that Enfold Systems *does not* have the bandwidth (right now) to deliver a 2.9 installer for Plone 2.5. We are looking at converging our commercial and the community product using .msi/wix but this will take us time. The problem is with Python 2.4.x and having to recompile all binary dependencies. I would suggest (take it with a grain of salt): - 2.5 ships with Zope 2.8.x installers (by default) and Python 2.3.x - People are allowed to create 2.5 w/ Zope 2.9.x installers (consider these "experimental") - Plone 3.0 ships with Zope 2.10 and Python 2.4.x or 2.5.x (offical) There is an installers list and I would start lobbying the installer maintainers. Before coming up with any proclamation. Its also important to look towards the OSX crowd to see how easy it is. Try to get some consensus if the people maintaining these installers will have a hard time porting to newer Python. Cheers, Alan Runyan ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: Re: Zope versions
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
[Framework-Team] Re: Re: Zope versions
On Mon, 2006-10-04 at 09:28 +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Hanno Schlichting wrote: > > I wouldn't want to make the decision on whether or not we are dropping > > support for Zope 2.9 for Plone 3.0 but decide it based on the features > > we might get this way. If we have a PLIP that requires Zope 2.10, so be > > it ;) > > Aren't the requirements more in versions of Five than Zope? If so we can > still support Zope 2.9 for Plone 3.0 as long as a recent enough Five is > installed. There is a lot of great functionality in Zope 3.2 thats not in Zope X3.0 -- doesn't matter what version of Five thats used, its the underlying version of zope3 that really counts. - Rocky -- Rocky Burt AdaptiveWave - Content Management as a Service http://www.adaptivewave.com Content Management Made Simple ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
