On Sun, 2009-04-19 at 16:32 +0200, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>
> I'm getting really tired of this discussion, and also that nobody
> comment either positively or negatively on what I write, but just
> seems to ignore it, which is frustrating, as it makes me think I'm
> completely right but nobody gets
On 4/20/09 3:35 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Stephan Richter wrote:
>> On Sunday 19 April 2009, Tres Seaver wrote:
>>> -1. As a branding choice (as opposed to a technology), "Zope 3" *is* a
>>> dead-end: it implies a strategy (replacing Zope 2) which we no longer
>>> believe in. I think the cons
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 23:32, Shane Hathaway wrote:
>> Also, it follows the open source tradition of slightly whimsical names. The
>> logo could be a train engine driven by a Zope fish. :-)
>
> Done. Does this mailing list accept attachements?
Wowsers. LOL!
Shane
__
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 18:42, Shane Hathaway wrote:
>> It occurred to me that one simple test of a Zope naming scheme is to
>> consider what employers will write in job descriptions.
>
> That's a bloody good point.
Thanks. I take it this point reinforces your proposal
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 18:42, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> It occurred to me that one simple test of a Zope naming scheme is to
> consider what employers will write in job descriptions.
That's a bloody good point.
--
Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok
http://regebro.wordpress.com/
+33 661 5
Am Montag, 20. April 2009 16:11 schrieb Martijn Faassen:
> Helmut Merz wrote:
> [snip story]
>
> > So that's my story.
> >
> > @Martijn: do you still have access to the PSU time machine?
> > It would be great if you could verify this somehow. Or maybe
> > you can even get clearer and more consisten
Shane Hathaway wrote:
> 1. "Candidate must be have Zope 3 experience."
>
> 2. "Candidate must be experienced with the Zope Toolkit."
Of course I meant...
1. "Candidate must have Zope 3 experience."
2. "Candidate must have Zope Toolkit experience."
Shane
___
Albertas Agejevas wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 08:32:52AM -0600, Shane Hathaway wrote:
>> Given that definition, Zope Toolkit will start relatively small, since
>> much of Zope 3 does not yet qualify. However, as people refine
>> packages, the packages will be reconsidered for inclusion in the
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 08:32:52AM -0600, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Given that definition, Zope Toolkit will start relatively small, since
> much of Zope 3 does not yet qualify. However, as people refine
> packages, the packages will be reconsidered for inclusion in the Zope
> Toolkit, and the Zope
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Sunday 19 April 2009, Tres Seaver wrote:
>> -1. As a branding choice (as opposed to a technology), "Zope 3" *is* a
>> dead-end: it implies a strategy (replacing Zope 2) which we no longer
>> believe in. I think the consequences of the brand confusion are hard
>> for t
Helmut Merz wrote:
[snip story]
> So that's my story.
>
> @Martijn: do you still have access to the PSU time machine? It
> would be great if you could verify this somehow. Or maybe you
> can even get clearer and more consistent information...
:)
We need to learn more about this Zivilisation! I
Am Montag, 20. April 2009 09:35 schrieb Martijn Faassen:
> Stephan Richter wrote:
> > ...
> > I never communicated to anyone that I believe that Zope 3 is
> > a successor of Zope 2. Other people pushed that message.
>
> That message has been out there from the start, no matter how
> it arose. One w
Hey Jonathan,
Jonathan (dev101) wrote:
> I was going to try to further explain my compromise which tried to
> move in the direction you are attempting, but upon reflection decided
> that you are completely right and that no-one else gets it (we are
> all as dumb as stones), so instead...
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Sunday 19 April 2009, Tres Seaver wrote:
>> -1. As a branding choice (as opposed to a technology), "Zope 3" *is* a
>> dead-end: it implies a strategy (replacing Zope 2) which we no longer
>> believe in. I think the consequences of the brand confusion are hard
>> for t
Jonathan (dev101) wrote:
> How about starting with "Zope 3 Toolkit" and then moving to "Zope Toolkit"
> after a year or so.
I'll repeat it again: the Zope Toolkit is not intended to fulfill the
same role as Zope 3. You imply something like that here. I know that the
Zope Toolkit isn't the same
On Sunday 19 April 2009, Tres Seaver wrote:
> -1. As a branding choice (as opposed to a technology), "Zope 3" *is* a
> dead-end: it implies a strategy (replacing Zope 2) which we no longer
> believe in. I think the consequences of the brand confusion are hard
> for those uf us "inside" to estima
On Sunday 19 April 2009, Jonathan (dev101) wrote:
> How about starting with "Zope 3 Toolkit" and then moving to "Zope Toolkit"
> after a year or so.
The Toolkit is not the same as Zope 3.
Regards,
Stephan
--
Stephan Richter
Web Software Design, Development and Training
Google me. "Zope Stephan R
I'm getting really tired of this discussion, and also that nobody
comment either positively or negatively on what I write, but just
seems to ignore it, which is frustrating, as it makes me think I'm
completely right but nobody gets it. ;-) I therefore will go with
Martijns suggestion of letting th
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 15:02, Jonathan (dev101) wrote:
> How about starting with "Zope 3 Toolkit" and then moving to "Zope Toolkit"
> after a year or so.
It's quite clear that nobody outside the community knows what Zope 3
is, and withing the community everybody disagrees on what Zope 3 is.
The
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jonathan (dev101) wrote:
> How about starting with "Zope 3 Toolkit" and then moving to "Zope Toolkit"
> after a year or so.
>
> This "evolutionary" approach may address some of the issues that have been
> raised:
>
> - there would be no sudden disa
uot;customers" as
possible to the new brand. It retains the value/goodwill associated with the
old brand while building value/goodwill for the new brand.
Jonathan
- Original Message -
From: "Lennart Regebro"
To:
Cc: "Tres Seaver" ; "Martijn Faassen"
;
S
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 04:43, Stephan Richter
wrote:
> On Thursday 16 April 2009, Tres Seaver wrote:
>> I would rather that we stop pushing the "Zope 3" brand now,
>
> I would rather keep the name Zope 3.
That's too bad, as it means that after all this discussion were are
back to status quo on t
On Thursday 16 April 2009, Tres Seaver wrote:
> I would rather that we stop pushing the "Zope 3" brand now,
I would rather keep the name Zope 3.
Regards,
Stephan
--
Stephan Richter
Web Software Design, Development and Training
Google me. "Zope Stephan Richter"
___
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> You're right of course, I apologize for going that way. I have little
> excuse for that.
You've taken a lot of heat in this thread. I hope that doesn't bother
you too much, because I think you're an extremely valuable team member.
This kind of discussion is hard, but it
+1 with Tres' position.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
> > Jim Fulton wrote:
> >> On Apr 17, 2009, at 11:49 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> >>
> >>> Simon Michael wrote:
> -1, Gary's is clearer.
>
Hey Rob,
Rob Miller wrote:
[snip]
> sure, i understand what you're saying here. it'd be great if some set of
> folks who are using the full Z3 app server platform decided to step up,
> create
> a website, refine the branding, and just generally breathe life into the
> project. but, until som
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Hey Martin,
>
> Martin Aspeli wrote:
> [snip]
>> Sigh... this discussion is just really difficult. I don't really
>> understand what the problem is here, or why it's indicative of what's
>> "wrong" with this community, but then I'm pretty lost in concepts and
>> names a
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 19:03, Simon Michael wrote:
> Um.. people will laugh at us ?
No, *with* us. Big difference. :)
--
Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok
http://regebro.wordpress.com/
+33 661 58 14 64
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> So, if I'm gonna act hurt, I'll claim that anybodys opinion here is
> being disregarded, it's mine. ;-)
> And I'll state it again, for clarities sake:
>
> I think that Zope 3 should be renamed. I proposed "Blue Bream" (and
...
> I have still to see any arguments against th
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 18:25, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Gary's, Mine, Tres', Simon's, Benji's and others I could find if I trolled
> through the thread, which I won't.
I can't see how these have been disregarded. Gary proposed that we say
that Zope 3 has been renamed to the Zope Toolkit. Martijn propo
Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Apr 17, 2009, at 12:17 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 18:00, Jim Fulton wrote:
>>> I think it is clear that you are disregarding many people's opinions.
>> What opinions have been disregarded, more exactly?
>
>
> Gary's, Mine, Tres', Simon's, Benj
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Jim Fulton wrote:
>> On Apr 17, 2009, at 11:49 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
>>
>>> Simon Michael wrote:
-1, Gary's is clearer.
>>> I think what is clear or not is very subjective. I think that at least
>>> is clear.
>>
>> I
Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Apr 17, 2009, at 11:49 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
>
>> Simon Michael wrote:
>>> -1, Gary's is clearer.
>> I think what is clear or not is very subjective. I think that at least
>> is clear.
>
>
> I think it is clear that you are disregarding many people's opinions.
Okay,
On Apr 17, 2009, at 12:17 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 18:00, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> I think it is clear that you are disregarding many people's opinions.
>
> What opinions have been disregarded, more exactly?
Gary's, Mine, Tres', Simon's, Benji's and others I could find
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 18:00, Jim Fulton wrote:
> I think it is clear that you are disregarding many people's opinions.
What opinions have been disregarded, more exactly?
--
Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok
http://regebro.wordpress.com/
+33 661 58 14 64
__
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 17:07, Simon Michael wrote:
> -1, Gary's is clearer.
But still not accurate. I've yet hear anybody actually support the
point of view that we should (internally or externally) push a story
that is not really true. If this indeed is the opinion of the
majority, I for one wo
Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Apr 17, 2009, at 11:49 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
>
>> Simon Michael wrote:
>>> -1, Gary's is clearer.
>> I think what is clear or not is very subjective. I think that at least
>> is clear.
>
>
> I think it is clear that you are disregarding many people's opinions.
Rega
On Apr 17, 2009, at 11:49 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Simon Michael wrote:
>> -1, Gary's is clearer.
>
> I think what is clear or not is very subjective. I think that at least
> is clear.
I think it is clear that you are disregarding many people's opinions.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton
Zope Corporation
Simon Michael wrote:
> -1, Gary's is clearer.
I think what is clear or not is very subjective. I think that at least
is clear.
Regards,
Martijn
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross po
-1, Gary's is clearer.
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailma
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 16:51, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> We should just retain the Zope 3 name to the outside world for the time
> being, but de-emphasize it in our communication. We push Zope Toolkit a
> lot more. If people want to get started using the toolkit, we point them
> to Grok, BFG and Pl
Hey,
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> A more truthful story is that Zope Toolkit is a base for writing
> frameworks, and that one of those frameworks was Zope 3, now renamed
> to . But the support in this thread for the previous
> story makes me wonder if we shouldn't push that, slightly more
> incorrect
Hey,
Carsten Senger wrote:
[snip]
> Btw: Somebody should change "Zope Framework" to "Zope Toolkit" on
> zope.org and remove the version number v3.5 from the Zope Toolkit
> documentation.
Could you fix the Zope Toolkit documentation and change it to 1.0? It's
in SVN.
It'd be very nice if you c
Lennart Regebro schrieb:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 14:47, Carsten Senger wrote:
>> Pushing this message inside the zope community is perfect. But I don't
>> see a need to communicate to outsiders that Zope 3 has become the Zope
>> Toolkit. This will be confusing to outsiders. They don't have to th
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 14:47, Carsten Senger wrote:
> Pushing this message inside the zope community is perfect. But I don't
> see a need to communicate to outsiders that Zope 3 has become the Zope
> Toolkit. This will be confusing to outsiders. They don't have to think
> about what Zope 3 is/was
Rob Miller schrieb:
> Gary Poster wrote:
>> This message seems like a reasonable start to me: "Zope 3 has become
>> focused on supporting frameworks and applications, rather than trying
>> to be one itself. It is now called the Zope Toolkit. Parts of it are
>> used by Zope 2, Plone, Grok,
Martijn Faassen schrieb:
> Hey,
>
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
> [snip]
>> I put a mark in my calendar for October to reconsider the future of the
>> name "Zope 3" then.
>
> Given the responses to this thread I'm starting to lean towards pushing
> the message to the outside that Zope 3 has become Z
Wow, long thread started just from an attempt to define the words we
were talking about. :)
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 10:04, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> I'll say again, though: Gary's version of the story ("the Zope 3
> community has become focused on supporting other app servers and
> frameworks, and i
Hey Martin,
Martin Aspeli wrote:
[snip]
> Sigh... this discussion is just really difficult. I don't really
> understand what the problem is here, or why it's indicative of what's
> "wrong" with this community, but then I'm pretty lost in concepts and
> names at this stage.
>
> I think you're r
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Martin Aspeli wrote:
> [snip]
>> I do realise that this derails Maritjn's focus slightly, but I don't
>> think we've lost the idea that there may be value in maintaining a
>> larger KGS.
>
> The whole idea of whatever-Zope 3-is-designated-as just being a "large
Hey,
Martin Aspeli wrote:
[snip]
> I do realise that this derails Maritjn's focus slightly, but I don't
> think we've lost the idea that there may be value in maintaining a
> larger KGS.
The whole idea of whatever-Zope 3-is-designated-as just being a "larger
KGS" strikes me as strange. Frankly
Rob Miller wrote:
> Gary Poster wrote:
>> This message seems like a reasonable start to me: "Zope 3 has become
>> focused on supporting frameworks and applications, rather than trying
>> to be one itself. It is now called the Zope Toolkit. Parts of it are
>> used by Zope 2, Plone, Grok, Re
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> If we want to do this right we need to come up with a good way to get
> the message out.
I think the only way you're going to manage to do that, is if you have a
website with a clear and unambiguous message on it.
It's like deja-vu all over again...
Martin
--
Autho
Gary Poster wrote:
> This message seems like a reasonable start to me: "Zope 3 has become
> focused on supporting frameworks and applications, rather than trying
> to be one itself. It is now called the Zope Toolkit. Parts of it are
> used by Zope 2, Plone, Grok, Repoze.bfg, and by many ot
Hey,
Martijn Faassen wrote:
[snip]
> I put a mark in my calendar for October to reconsider the future of the
> name "Zope 3" then.
Given the responses to this thread I'm starting to lean towards pushing
the message to the outside that Zope 3 has become Zope Toolkit, has a
different focus, basi
Hey,
Simon Michael wrote:
[snip]
> Insiders know that the Toolkit going forward will be much more focussed than
> old Zope 3 was, but outsiders don't need
> those details; outsiders certainly won't understand subtle intra-project
> renamings and dyings. If some of those details
> are positive
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 06:06, Gary Poster wrote:
>>> So, again, in sum, I propose that this discussion should simply be reduced
>>> to a rename to start with: Zope 3, as defined by the KGS -> Zope To
> This message seems like a reasonable start to me: "Zope 3 has become
> focused on supporting frameworks and applications, rather than trying
> to be one itself. It is now called the Zope Toolkit. Parts of it are
> used by Zope 2, Plone, Grok, Repoze.bfg, and by many other different
> a
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 06:06, Gary Poster wrote:
>> So, again, in sum, I propose that this discussion should simply be reduced
>> to a rename to start with: Zope 3, as defined by the KGS -> Zope Toolkit.
>
> As I understand it (but Martijn may correct me) the Zope Toolki
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:06 AM, Gary Poster wrote:
> This message seems like a reasonable start to me: "Zope 3 has become
> focused on supporting frameworks and applications, rather than trying
> to be one itself. It is now called the Zope Toolkit. Parts of it are
> used by Zope 2, Plone, Gr
Thank you for saying this so well.
+1
Jim
On Apr 16, 2009, at 12:06 AM, Gary Poster wrote:
>
> On Apr 15, 2009, at 11:28 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>
>> Here are a list of things I have seen that you may mean when you say
>> "Zope 3". I'm sure I missed several:
>>
>> 1. Whatever is included in
Hey,
Gary Poster wrote:
[snip]
> So, again, in sum, I propose that this discussion should simply be
> reduced to a rename to start with: Zope 3, as defined by the KGS ->
> Zope Toolkit. The software switch that this name change implies has
> started quite some time ago, with the eggificatio
Jens W. Klein wrote:
[snip]
> I would divide the Zope Toolkit in two parts:
> (1) The real core which has to be mature. I doubt its all current 50-70
> packages (dont ask me which parts this are, most of the active authors
> here are knowing it better)
> (2) The more loose ends where more agili
I'am an almost passive reader of this list and typical 'user', or lets
say, software I write is a consumer of all this useful Zope-SOMETHING.
I observed your discussion and read all the threads and I wasnt sure all
the time if its the right direction. Writing code is better than
discussing name
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 06:06, Gary Poster wrote:
> So, again, in sum, I propose that this discussion should simply be reduced
> to a rename to start with: Zope 3, as defined by the KGS -> Zope Toolkit.
As I understand it (but Martijn may correct me) the Zope Toolkit will
have it's own KGS which
On Apr 15, 2009, at 11:28 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> Here are a list of things I have seen that you may mean when you say
> "Zope 3". I'm sure I missed several:
>
> 1. Whatever is included in the Zope 3 tgz that you download.
>
> 2. All the packages included in the Zope 3 KGS. (Should be the sa
Here are a list of things I have seen that you may mean when you say
"Zope 3". I'm sure I missed several:
1. Whatever is included in the Zope 3 tgz that you download.
2. All the packages included in the Zope 3 KGS. (Should be the same as
1, if I understand correctly.)
3. 1 or 2 minus the ZMI.
4
67 matches
Mail list logo
