On 04.11.2008 18:41 Uhr, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
On 04.11.2008 18:19 Uhr, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On Nov 4, 2008, at 13:59 , Hanno Schlichting wrote:
If I'm not mistaken there was something about every release being
supported two years after its initial release in those dis
Andreas Jung wrote:
> On 04.11.2008 18:19 Uhr, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
>> On Nov 4, 2008, at 13:59 , Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>>
>>> If I'm not mistaken there was something about every release being
>>> supported two years after its initial release in those discussions.
>>>
>>> But time went on, we h
On 04.11.2008 18:19 Uhr, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Nov 4, 2008, at 13:59 , Hanno Schlichting wrote:
If I'm not mistaken there was something about every release being
supported two years after its initial release in those discussions.
But time went
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
> On Nov 4, 2008, at 13:59 , Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>
>> If I'm not mistaken there was something about every release being
>> supported two years after its initial release in those discussions.
>>
>> But time went on, we haven't sticked to a time-based release schedule
>> a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Nov 4, 2008, at 13:59 , Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> If I'm not mistaken there was something about every release being
> supported two years after its initial release in those discussions.
>
> But time went on, we haven't sticked to a time-based rel
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
>
> On Nov 4, 2008, at 09:10 , Andreas Jung wrote:
>
>>> In the meantime, we can acknowledge that 2.8 and 2.9 are
>>> "retired" (no
>>> future work except maybe important security fixes),
>
>> +1
>
>>> and announce that
>>> 2.10 will be retired after the 2.12 release:
>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Nov 4, 2008, at 09:10 , Andreas Jung wrote:
>> In the meantime, we can acknowledge that 2.8 and 2.9 are
>> "retired" (no
>> future work except maybe important security fixes),
>
>
> +1
>
>> and announce that
>> 2.10 will be retired after the 2.1
On 31.10.2008 18:36 Uhr, Tres Seaver wrote:
In that case Plone will neither use 2.11 nor 2.12 but go straight for a
Zope 2.13 including Python 2.6. A major release every six month would be
desirable for us in that case. Right now I don't see anyone, who would
be using those releases. If those
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andreas Jung wrote:
> On 30.10.2008 21:41 Uhr, Tres Seaver wrote:
>
> What are our current needs for having a Python 2.5 compatible Zope 2
> version (except it would be nice for having one). Being in sync with the
> latest Python 2.6 version is much
> Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> From what I know of other consumers of Zope 2, it seems Haufe doesn't
> have a need for any of the Zope 2.12 features at this point,
> but is using Zope 2.11 / Zope 3.4 as a development base.
>
> There is no special need for a Zope 2.12 release from the Haufe s
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 4:28 AM, Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If Sidnei should be successful with making Plone 2.11 compatible with Python
> 2.5 then we might add "inofficial" support for Python 2.5 to the current
> Zope 2.11 release...but as stated earlier I would like to see some arg
On 30.10.2008 21:41 Uhr, Tres Seaver wrote:
> From a Zope perspective 2.11 should have had Python 2.5 support, but
nobody cared enough to make it happen. We can support Python 2.4 and 2.5
alone in Zope 2.12 and release it in the next months.
We should do a 2.12 very soon (before year end, lik
Tres Seaver wrote:
> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> I'm fine with having Plone 4 able to run on a 2.6-compatible Zope2. If
> we add Python 2.6 to the supported list for a no-later-than Q3 2009 Zope
> release, that should be sufficient, no?
Sure!
>> From a Zope perspective 2.11 should have had Python
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Tres Seaver wrote:
>> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>>> Here's a list of things I'd like to see in a 2.12 release:
>>> - Official Python 2.5 and 2.6 support (almost done, requires a community
>>> decision on when we call Restriced
Tres Seaver wrote:
> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>> Here's a list of things I'd like to see in a 2.12 release:
>
>> - Official Python 2.5 and 2.6 support (almost done, requires a community
>> decision on when we call RestricedPython supported and reviewed)
>
> +1 for 2.5; I'm pretty sure 2.6 is not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
>>> - Official Python 2.5 and 2.6 support (almost done, requires a community
>>> decision on when we call RestricedPython supported and reviewed)
>> +1 for 2.5; I'm pretty sure 2.6 is not there yet, and may be too hard
>> to ai
>> - Official Python 2.5 and 2.6 support (almost done, requires a community
>> decision on when we call RestricedPython supported and reviewed)
>
> +1 for 2.5; I'm pretty sure 2.6 is not there yet, and may be too hard
> to aim for in one release.
What makes you think so?
--
Sidnei da Silva
Enfo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
>> IMHO we shouldn't worry about 2.10 and 2.11 and just care about 2.12 at
>> this point. By now it should work with Python 2.5, right? Let's release
>> it soonish. Not only will it bring Py
On 30.10.2008 19:38 Uhr, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
So from a Plone perspective there is no demand for any soon feature
freeze or release of Zope 2 itself. Alpha releases might come in handy
during spring next year, but even beta versions are not going to be
required or particular useful to us.
Andreas Jung wrote:
> I think there is need for setting a release date right now - I know that
> this a total contradiction to our former approach with time-based
> releases. The current 2.11 codebase is pretty much in sync with the
> latest Zope web-components. Since the Zope 2 development is in p
On 30.10.2008 18:01 Uhr, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 15:03, Hanno Schlichting<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
- Reconsider getting rid of ZClasses
+1
I have some things I want to do when it coms to timezones, so I would
like to mentally prepare me for about what release date we
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 15:03, Hanno Schlichting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - Reconsider getting rid of ZClasses
+1
I have some things I want to do when it coms to timezones, so I would
like to mentally prepare me for about what release date we are talking
about here, so I know when I have to d
Previously Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Still I'd put my list out here. Maybe there are others who have been
> thinking into the same direction. Here's a list of things I'd like to
> see in a 2.12 release:
>
> - Reconsider getting rid of ZClasses
>
> I know this one is not popular, but from what I
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> IMHO we shouldn't worry about 2.10 and 2.11 and just care about 2.12 at
> this point. By now it should work with Python 2.5, right? Let's release
> it soonish. Not only will it bring Python 2.5 compatibility but it also
> gets rid of Acquisition-wrapped views a
24 matches
Mail list logo
