Sidnei da Silva wrote:
Run 'inst/WinBuilders/buildout zope'.
Ah, you need Inno 5.x too. See inst/WinBuilders/README.txt for the
complete instructions.
OK, are either you (or anyone else at Enfold) or Tim going to roll the
2.9.1 binary or would you like me to pick it up from now on?
cheers,
--On 2. März 2006 11:42:09 +0100 Wolfgang Strobl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In case your file is to be taken as the Zope-2.9.1 windows release i'd
need it at the Zope-2.9.1 release folder and not at your member folder.
Sure. I've removed it from my member folder.
I think one needs to be
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 06:43:38PM +, Chris Withers wrote:
| Sidnei da Silva wrote:
| Run 'inst/WinBuilders/buildout zope'.
|
| Ah, you need Inno 5.x too. See inst/WinBuilders/README.txt for the
| complete instructions.
|
| OK, are either you (or anyone else at Enfold) or Tim going to roll
On Tue, 2006-28-02 at 13:21 +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
[snip]
I would vote for spelling out Zed (which would also be a little easier
to google but might create trademark problems). The namespace package
could either be 'z' or 'zed'.
Then again, I
On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 09:43:03 -0330, Rocky Burt wrote:
Anyway, this still keeps things very confusing from a naming perspective
(mostly for new adopters). So having said all of that, I am
actually +1 on Jim's proposal #2. What I see from that (someone correct
me if I'm wrong) is the
+1 on Jim's suggestion #2.
However, if I am understanding things correctly, it doesn't really sound
like door #2 entails a huge deviation from from our current course of
bringing Zope 2 and Zope 3 together gradually. I don't really care what
the converged product is called, be it Zope 2.250 or
Geoff Davis wrote:
I think that the idea of giving Zed its own, distinct identity is great.
I think it is stupid.
We (Zope Corp + the Zope Community) have spent 8 years building the Zope
brand, and you want to restart from scratch ?
S.
--
Stéfane Fermigier, Tel: +33 (0)6 63 04 12 77
On Thursday 02 March 2006 10:29, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
Geoff Davis wrote:
I think that the idea of giving Zed its own, distinct identity is great.
I think it is stupid.
Me too!!
Regards,
Stephan
--
Stephan Richter
CBU Physics Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k -
Geoff Davis wrote:
+1 on Jim's suggestion #2.
However, if I am understanding things correctly, it doesn't really sound
like door #2 entails a huge deviation from from our current course of
bringing Zope 2 and Zope 3 together gradually. I don't really care what
the converged product is called,
On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 10:38:03 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
I think that the idea of giving Zed its own, distinct identity is great.
Zope 3 is a _huge_ overhaul and it needs to be obvious to the world that
it is dramatically better than crufty old Zope 2. Zope 3 then becomes the
Zed application
Geoff Davis wrote:
Yes, and the use of the new name Z or Zed is a way to emphasize that
the Zed library is NOT a big, monolithic app server; rather, it's
something new and cool.
Zope 3 is new and cool.
Or at least, let's spin it this way.
Screencasts, podcasts, 14'59 wikis (quicker than
Stefane Fermigier wrote:
Geoff Davis wrote:
I think that the idea of giving Zed its own, distinct identity is great..
I think it is stupid.
We (Zope Corp + the Zope Community) have spent 8 years building the Zope
brand, and you want to restart from scratch ?
Hehe, poor Geoff. :)
In the
Geoff Davis wrote:
On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 10:38:03 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
I think that the idea of giving Zed its own, distinct identity is great.
Zope 3 is a _huge_ overhaul and it needs to be obvious to the world that
it is dramatically better than crufty old Zope 2. Zope 3 then becomes the
Paul Everitt wrote:
...
People have it set in their brain that Zope is a monolithic web
application server. Hard to dispel that meme.
Yup. I'd rather adjust the meme to:
Zope is a agile flexible extensible app server with rich services.
:)
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL
On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 09:43:03 -0330, Rocky Burt wrote:
On Tue, 2006-28-02 at 13:21 +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
[snip]
I would vote for spelling out Zed (which would also be a little easier
to google but might create trademark problems). The namespace
Strange how (most of) the Plone people seem to be so quick in willing to
sacrifice the Zope brand :(
S.
--
Stéfane Fermigier, Tel: +33 (0)6 63 04 12 77 (mobile).
Nuxeo Collaborative Portal Server: http://www.nuxeo.com/cps
Gestion de contenu web / portail collaboratif / groupware / open
Stefane Fermigier wrote:
I think that the idea of giving Zed its own, distinct identity is great.
I think it is stupid.
We (Zope Corp + the Zope Community) have spent 8 years building the Zope
brand, and you want to restart from scratch ?
Good point. There's the question: Does this zed
Stefane Fermigier wrote:
Strange how (most of) the Plone people seem to be so quick in willing to
sacrifice the Zope brand :(
It's not about sacrificing the Zope-the-app-server brand. It's actually
about growing it in the sense that it becomes much clearer WHAT THE HELL
Zope actually is. Or can
Stefane Fermigier wrote:
Strange how (most of) the Plone people seem to be so quick in willing to
sacrifice the Zope brand :(
um, if you reread what i said, and what i think rocky is trying to say,
i'm in favor of _keeping_ the zope brand for the app server, which is
what zope has always
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Good point. There's the question: Does this zed thing need a different
name at all? If we want other people to pick it up, then it seems like a
good idea to distinguish it from Zope-the-app-server. Paul seems to
suggest that in his response.
How about zopelib?
Benji York wrote:
Good point. There's the question: Does this zed thing need a different
name at all? If we want other people to pick it up, then it seems like a
good idea to distinguish it from Zope-the-app-server. Paul seems to
suggest that in his response.
How about zopelib?
If we want
On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 19:31:38 -, Stefane Fermigier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Strange how (most of) the Plone people seem to be so quick in willing to
sacrifice the Zope brand :(
I don't think that's true. I'm certainly not, and I've not heard anyone
directly in favour of that either. What
On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 16:18:27 -, Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Zope is a agile flexible extensible app server with rich services.
You forgot Enterprise.
Martin
--
(muted)
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 09:58 +0100, Christian Theune wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, 2006-02-05 at 12:11 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
A while ago, we had some discussion on when to make releases and
how long to support deprecated features. The discussion has died down
so I'll summarize
24 matches
Mail list logo
