[Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, Since Zope 2.8 has now been released, we can start talking about what would be in Zope 2.9. I have some ideas: * newer version of Five included (whatever version is current then) * Zope 3.1 included * Python 2.4 support I think these could all be accomplished without getting too

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Janko Hauser
Am 17.06.2005 um 11:45 schrieb Martijn Faassen: Hi there, Since Zope 2.8 has now been released, we can start talking about what would be in Zope 2.9. I have some ideas: * newer version of Five included (whatever version is current then) * Zope 3.1 included * Python 2.4 support +1

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Andreas Jung
--On 17. Juni 2005 11:45:49 +0200 Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi there, Since Zope 2.8 has now been released, we can start talking about what would be in Zope 2.9. I have some ideas: * newer version of Five included (whatever version is current then) * Zope 3.1 included *

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Jens Vagelpohl
I'd be happy if this was *all* that changed in Zope 2.9. This way we can release Zope 2.9 in the forseeable future, like, late this year. If Zope 3 is on track there will already be a Zope 3.2 release imminent by then, but I'm okay with Zope 2.x running a version behind in the name of

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Lennart Regebro
On 6/17/05, Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What do people think? Just an idea: One thing that would be interesting and increase the Z3 compatibility is to use traversing adapters, and then, of course, make a default adapter that implements Zope2 traversing for objects that does not

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: This is really great news! I am going to start working at getting Chalmers to be one of the key players in the foundation which would make the foundation even more vendor-neutral. I am confident that this will go through. This almost sounds as if the Foundation

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Andreas Jung
--On 17. Juni 2005 13:04:17 +0200 Philipp von Weitershausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: This is really great news! I am going to start working at getting Chalmers to be one of the key players in the foundation which would make the foundation even more

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Jean-Marc Orliaguet
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: This is really great news! I am going to start working at getting Chalmers to be one of the key players in the foundation which would make the foundation even more vendor-neutral. I am confident that this will go through. This

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: This is really great news! I am going to start working at getting Chalmers to be one of the key players in the foundation which would make the foundation even more vendor-neutral. I am confident that

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Andreas Jung wrote: --On 17. Juni 2005 13:04:17 +0200 Philipp von Weitershausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: This is really great news! I am going to start working at getting Chalmers to be one of the key players in the foundation which would make the foundation even

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Martijn Faassen
Andreas Jung wrote: [snip] Depending on how Zope 3.2 will be released it would be cool to have 2.9 shipped with Zope 3.2. I don#t know about the 3.2 release schedule. Possibly we could focus on a 2.9 release in fall (October)... I don't expect Zope 3.2 will be released by october. Jim is

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Andreas Jung
--On 17. Juni 2005 13:29:33 +0200 Philipp von Weitershausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: --On 17. Juni 2005 13:04:17 +0200 Philipp von Weitershausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: This is really great news! I am going to start working at getting

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Martijn Faassen
Lennart Regebro wrote: On 6/17/05, Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What do people think? Just an idea: One thing that would be interesting and increase the Z3 compatibility is to use traversing adapters, and then, of course, make a default adapter that implements Zope2 traversing

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Andreas Jung
--On 17. Juni 2005 13:34:34 +0200 Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: [snip] Depending on how Zope 3.2 will be released it would be cool to have 2.9 shipped with Zope 3.2. I don#t know about the 3.2 release schedule. Possibly we could focus on a 2.9 release in

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Jean-Marc Orliaguet
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: This is really great news! I am going to start working at getting Chalmers to be one of the key players in the foundation which would make the foundation even more

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Stephan Richter
On Friday 17 June 2005 07:16, Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: Then when I look at the members of the Plone foundation ( http://plone.org/foundation/about/board/list ) I only see companies, except that ZC is not represented. So even if every member gets a vote, how much does that vote count in the

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Paul Everitt
On Jun 17, 2005, at 1:49 PM, Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: However, most members do not write code during their free time, do they? What happens when the members write code under working hours, their respective employers must well have something to say about it? The PF actually did research

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Paul Everitt
On Jun 17, 2005, at 1:52 PM, Stephan Richter wrote: On Friday 17 June 2005 07:16, Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: Then when I look at the members of the Plone foundation ( http://plone.org/foundation/about/board/list ) I only see companies, except that ZC is not represented. So even if every

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Jim Fulton
Martijn Faassen wrote: Hi there, Since Zope 2.8 has now been released, we can start talking about what would be in Zope 2.9. Yup. I'll just remind everybody that, starting with Zope 2.9 and Zope 3.2, we are switching to time based, rather than feature-based releases. We will make feature

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Paul Everitt
On Jun 17, 2005, at 2:49 PM, Stefane Fermigier wrote: Paul Everitt wrote: Other foundations approach things a bit differently. (I did quite a bit of research on this for the Plone Foundation.) Eric has done some research recently on the different successful Open Source / Free

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Max M
Jim Fulton wrote: Further, we will coordinate the releases. Essentially, *Zope* is switching to a new release schedule. Zope will be released every 6 months and the releases will be in two parts, a Zope 2 part that includes the current Zope 3 and a Zope 3 part. Will they have the same

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Jim Fulton
Max M wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: Further, we will coordinate the releases. Essentially, *Zope* is switching to a new release schedule. Zope will be released every 6 months and the releases will be in two parts, a Zope 2 part that includes the current Zope 3 and a Zope 3 part. Will they

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Martijn Faassen
Andreas Jung wrote: --On 17. Juni 2005 13:34:34 +0200 Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: [snip] Depending on how Zope 3.2 will be released it would be cool to have 2.9 shipped with Zope 3.2. I don#t know about the 3.2 release schedule. Possibly we could focus on

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Martijn Faassen
Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: [snip] I'll just remind everybody that, starting with Zope 2.9 and Zope 3.2, we are switching to time based, rather than feature-based releases. We will make feature releases of Zope 2 and Zope 3 every 6 months, starting this December. I suggest a

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Martijn Faassen
Jim Fulton wrote: Max M wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: Further, we will coordinate the releases. Essentially, *Zope* is switching to a new release schedule. Zope will be released every 6 months and the releases will be in two parts, a Zope 2 part that includes the current Zope 3 and a Zope 3

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Chris McDonough
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 11:45 +0200, Martijn Faassen wrote: Then there's something I know little about, but is also believed planned for Zope 2.9: * blob storage, file iterators Thanks for mentioning this. I'd like to see blob storage get in before 2.9. I think it'd be a good candidate for

[Zope-dev] Re: Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Stefane Fermigier
Has my message been rejected (from zope-dev) or not ? I'm confused. S. Stefane Fermigier wrote: Paul Everitt wrote: Other foundations approach things a bit differently. (I did quite a bit of research on this for the Plone Foundation.) Eric has done some research recently on the

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Chris McDonough
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 07:52 -0400, Stephan Richter wrote: Also, I agree with Andreas and Philipp that developers should be members, not companies. Otherwise, how could I, as an independent developer, have a say? BTW, this is also positive for companies, since they can have several

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Jim Fulton
Martijn Faassen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: [snip] I'll just remind everybody that, starting with Zope 2.9 and Zope 3.2, we are switching to time based, rather than feature-based releases. We will make feature releases of Zope 2 and Zope 3 every 6 months, starting this

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Andreas Jung
--On 17. Juni 2005 08:27:43 -0400 Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll just remind everybody that, starting with Zope 2.9 and Zope 3.2, we are switching to time based, rather than feature-based releases. We will make feature releases of Zope 2 and Zope 3 every 6 months, starting this

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Stefane Fermigier
Paul Everitt wrote: Other foundations approach things a bit differently. (I did quite a bit of research on this for the Plone Foundation.) Eric has done some research recently on the different successful Open Source / Free Software foundations out there that have the mission to develop and

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Stefane Fermigier
Stefane Fermigier wrote: I hope we will be able to discuss this further next week, but also that these discussions will be able to procede with the technical side of things during the sprint next week. s/with/alongside/ Sorry for my poor english. Remember that some of us are not native

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Chris McDonough
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 15:54 +0200, Andreas Jung wrote: - the trunk is no longer a development area. Developments must happen on branches and will be merged into the trunk as soon as the stuff is stable. I won't be acceptable to have half-baked stuff in the trunk. This will hold up the

[Zope-dev] Zope(ish) Windows services vs shutdown

2005-06-17 Thread Tim Peters
I rewrote ZRS's Windows service code to use the new named events set by current versions of Zope's nt_svcutils/service.py. Overall, this works really slick, but with a glitch: the ZRS log files suggest that the signal events never get set when Windows is shutting down, they only fire when the

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Jim Fulton
Chris McDonough wrote: On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 15:54 +0200, Andreas Jung wrote: - the trunk is no longer a development area. Developments must happen on branches and will be merged into the trunk as soon as the stuff is stable. I won't be acceptable to have half-baked stuff in the trunk. This

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Florent Guillaume
Just an idea: One thing that would be interesting and increase the Z3 compatibility is to use traversing adapters, and then, of course, make a default adapter that implements Zope2 traversing for objects that does not have a traversing adapter. Stupid or brilliant? :) I know

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Jim Fulton
Chris McDonough wrote: On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 11:45 +0200, Martijn Faassen wrote: Then there's something I know little about, but is also believed planned for Zope 2.9: * blob storage, file iterators Thanks for mentioning this. I'd like to see blob storage get in before 2.9. I think it'd

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Andreas Jung
--On 17. Juni 2005 10:04:41 -0400 Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 15:54 +0200, Andreas Jung wrote: - the trunk is no longer a development area. Developments must happen on branches and will be merged into the trunk as soon as the stuff is stable. I won't be

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Jim Fulton
Florent Guillaume wrote: Just an idea: One thing that would be interesting and increase the Z3 compatibility is to use traversing adapters, and then, of course, make a default adapter that implements Zope2 traversing for objects that does not have a traversing adapter. Stupid or brilliant? :)

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Lennart Regebro
On 6/17/05, Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The rule for Zope 3 has been that the trunk needs to be stable, but that isn't enough. I think the rule should be that the trunk should be ready to make a beta release at any time. +1e79 -- Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo http://www.nuxeo.com/ CPS

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Chris McDonough
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 10:12 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: Thanks for mentioning this. I'd like to see blob storage get in before 2.9. I think it'd be a good candidate for a 2.8-dot release because it's backwards compatible and optional. It ahould be done (needs a bit more testing and some

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Jim Fulton
Chris McDonough wrote: On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 10:12 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: ... We have historically always had the opportunity to introduce features that preserve 100% b/c (like filestream iterators) in point releases. This has worked pretty well for the last few years. I wasn't aware of

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Chris McDonough
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 11:04 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: Chris McDonough wrote: On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 10:12 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: ... We have historically always had the opportunity to introduce features that preserve 100% b/c (like filestream iterators) in point releases. This has

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Jim Fulton
Martijn Faassen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: Max M wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: Further, we will coordinate the releases. Essentially, *Zope* is switching to a new release schedule. Zope will be released every 6 months and the releases will be in two parts, a Zope 2 part that includes the

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Paul Winkler
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 10:28:11AM -0400, Chris McDonough wrote: We have historically always had the opportunity to introduce features that preserve 100% b/c (like filestream iterators) in point releases. This has worked pretty well for the last few years. Strongly agree. By my count there

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Chris McDonough
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 12:00 -0400, Paul Winkler wrote: On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 10:28:11AM -0400, Chris McDonough wrote: We have historically always had the opportunity to introduce features that preserve 100% b/c (like filestream iterators) in point releases. This has worked pretty well for

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Jim Fulton
Paul Winkler wrote: On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 10:28:11AM -0400, Chris McDonough wrote: We have historically always had the opportunity to introduce features that preserve 100% b/c (like filestream iterators) in point releases. This has worked pretty well for the last few years. Strongly

[Zope-dev] Zope Corporation's Initial Reaction on the ZF Comments

2005-06-17 Thread Hadar Pedhazur
My first attempt to post to this list bounced, because I'm not a subscriber. Jim enabled me to post, so I'm resending, without cc'ing the z3lab list again. If you hit reply-all, please add [EMAIL PROTECTED] to the cc list (if you're allowed to post there as well :-) Hi all. Whew, lots of

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jim Fulton wrote: Chris McDonough wrote: On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 10:12 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: ... We have historically always had the opportunity to introduce features that preserve 100% b/c (like filestream iterators) in point releases.

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Jim Fulton
Tres Seaver wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jim Fulton wrote: Chris McDonough wrote: On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 10:12 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: ... We have historically always had the opportunity to introduce features that preserve 100% b/c (like filestream iterators)

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Zope Corporation's Initial Reaction on the ZF Comments

2005-06-17 Thread Jim Fulton
Hadar Pedhazur wrote: ... I can't think of any open source foundation that has company voting in the governance. There is a role for companies, as sponsors. But, not in the governance. Stefane pointed out the Eclipse Foundation already, so it's a little surprising that you are still looking

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jim Fulton wrote: Tres Seaver wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jim Fulton wrote: Chris McDonough wrote: On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 10:12 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: ... We have historically always had the opportunity to

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Tim Peters
[Tres Seaver] Agreed, in theory. In practice, the usual handwave has been to construe the absence of the feature as a bug (with greater or lesser justification). Like that's going to change wink. Perhaps we can be more hard-nosed about a no new features in third-dot releases policy *after*

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Jim Fulton
Tres Seaver wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jim Fulton wrote: Tres Seaver wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jim Fulton wrote: Chris McDonough wrote: On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 10:12 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: ... We have historically always

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Chris McDonough
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 13:00 -0400, Tim Peters wrote: [Tres Seaver] Agreed, in theory. In practice, the usual handwave has been to construe the absence of the feature as a bug (with greater or lesser justification). Like that's going to change wink. Over the last year Tres, Andreas, Tim,

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Jean-Marc Orliaguet
Chris McDonough wrote: On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 07:52 -0400, Stephan Richter wrote: Also, I agree with Andreas and Philipp that developers should be members, not companies. Otherwise, how could I, as an independent developer, have a say? BTW, this is also positive for companies, since they can

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Andreas Jung
--On 17. Juni 2005 13:17:13 -0400 Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Policy aside, I trust all of these people implicitly to do the right thing with judging whether a feature should make it into a dot release and I wouldn't complain any of them snuck a minor feature into one. If one

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.9 goals

2005-06-17 Thread Paul Winkler
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 12:17:27PM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: Fortunately, we'll be making feature releases every 6 months, so this should not be a problem. OK. Assuming the new release process works as intended, fine w/ me. Maybe this should be clarified on the SVN / CVS FAQ pages? -- Paul

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope Corporation's Initial Reaction on the ZF Comments

2005-06-17 Thread Chris McDonough
I found this interesting enough to look into anyway... for anybody who is interested, here's the scoop. CA has 2 seats out of 9 on the Plone Foundation board. Apparently there's special treatment of these seats via http://plone.org/foundation/about/board/special_seats which is mostly a perk to

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Chris McDonough wrote: On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 07:52 -0400, Stephan Richter wrote: Also, I agree with Andreas and Philipp that developers should be members, not companies. Otherwise, how could I, as an independent developer, have a say? BTW, this is also positive for companies, since they can

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope Corporation's Initial Reaction on the ZF Comments

2005-06-17 Thread Tim Peters
[Chris McDonough] ... The Apache Software Foundation has 9 members (http://www.apache.org/foundation/board/). Their board of directors has 9 members, but the ASF has many more members than that: http://www.apache.org/foundation/members.html I don't recognize all the names, but at least

[Zope-dev] RE: Zope(ish) Windows services vs shutdown

2005-06-17 Thread Mark Hammond
[Tim] So, best guesses (please scream where I'm wrong): - This is because service.py doesn't define a SvcShutdown method, just a SvcStop method, - It's a good idea to add a SvcShutdown method to service.py. - It would suffice to add SvcShutdown = SvcStop to service.py. If

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Chris McDonough
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 23:05 +0200, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: From what I read from Rob in an interview in LWN, membership to the foundation will be funded by membership dues. Given that any actual facts and further discussions involving ZC have been postponed to the IRC chat on