Lennart Regebro wrote:
>
> True. But in true XP fashion, each release could simply contain the features
> that are finished. And if this i18n is finished, then it can be included. I
> think that would also prevent some drag, because now we decided on which
> features should be included, and sever
Truth is that the Zope code has done anything but languish in the last few
months. Unfortunately most people are bound by our release cycle, which has
given that impression.
As for i18n in 2.6, The Zope Pope gave the nod, so I consider it a done deal,
assuming it gets checked in.
-Casey
On W
From: "James Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> We had to wait this long, why not wait for a bit longer. I just hope it
> doesn't give some the excuse to drag it on more. That was one of the
things
> I loved about Zope was Release Early/often mantra. Now with the 2.6
dabacle
> lasting over 3 months
We had to wait this long, why not wait for a bit longer. I just hope it
doesn't give some the excuse to drag it on more. That was one of the things
I loved about Zope was Release Early/often mantra. Now with the 2.6 dabacle
lasting over 3 months. This better not happen again people :-) We
From: "Florent Guillaume" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> As Jim said, "If we want to get this into 2.6, we need to move quickly."
I want it in. It's so amazingly useful, that I want it. 2.6 is moving so
slow anyway, that I don't see it as a big problem.
Best Regards
Lennart Regebro, Torped
http://www.ea
