Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Christian Theune
Hi, On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 08:52 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote: On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 08:42, Christian Theune c...@gocept.com wrote: On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 08:35 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote: 1. Areas that need somebody responsible should get one. We need somebody to bug people about bugs in

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martin Aspeli
Lennart Regebro wrote: I'm talking about a group of people who act as if they're responsible, not your mythical committee. We should be able to find a bunch of people with a sense of responsibility, right? Yes. But I don't think making them a steering group is going to help. Just to take

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 09:13, Christian Theune c...@gocept.com wrote: For some reason the argument evades me: People randomly doing stuff will end in good things. People (trying) to thoughtfully organize won't. It's not an argument, it's a statement of fact. No. The steering group should not

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 09:21, Martin Aspeli optilude+li...@gmail.com wrote: If anything, we started out with too little process and found there were gaps we had to plug. Ah. Now, THIS I like. Let's focus on this: Start out with as little process and as few officialisms as possible. And I don't

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.file/trunk/ Update package mailing list address. Remove zpkg stuff.

2009-03-03 Thread Dan Korostelev
2009/3/2 Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com: -include package=zope.file/ I believe people still use the ZCML slug files like the above. They certainly aren't related to 'zpkg'.  The intent of the slugs was to allow for something like 'sites-available' / 'sites-enabled' (the pattern in a stock

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.file/trunk/ Update package mailing list address. Remove zpkg stuff.

2009-03-03 Thread Baiju M
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Dan Korostelev nad...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/3/2 Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com: -include package=zope.file/ I believe people still use the ZCML slug files like the above. They certainly aren't related to 'zpkg'.  The intent of the slugs was to allow for

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Hermann Himmelbauer
Am Montag 02 März 2009 18:11:59 schrieb Chris McDonough: Martijn Faassen wrote: The Zope Framework project == :Author: Martijn Faassen :Date: 2009-03-02 Introduction This document offers suggestions to reorganize our community so we can

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Hanno Schlichting
Martijn Faassen wrote: The main innovations in concepts are the name Zope Framework to distinguish it from the Zope 3 application server and the core/extra concept. These are all hopefully descriptions of what are current practices, simply making them more explicit. From what I read we do

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Hermann Himmelbauer
Am Montag 02 März 2009 18:49:43 schrieb Adam GROSZER: Hello, I think we need some sort of stering group (or person(s)). Without rules and decisions to follow we're going to end up like headless chicken running around in the kitchen. Noone knows the direction. Exactly. And if we look at other

[Zope-dev] Zope Tests: 6 OK

2009-03-03 Thread Zope Tests Summarizer
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Mon Mar 2 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Tue Mar 3 12:00:00 2009 UTC. There were 6 messages: 6 from Zope Tests. Tests passed OK --- Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Mon Mar 2 20:25:23 EST 2009 URL:

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Hermann Himmelbauer
Am Montag 02 März 2009 19:34:11 schrieb Tres Seaver: Adam GROSZER wrote: I think we need some sort of stering group (or person(s)). Without rules and decisions to follow we're going to end up like headless chicken running around in the kitchen. Noone knows the direction. Yes sometimes

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Roger Ineichen
Hi Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project [...] Grok and Repoze are in part *workarounds* for the deficiencies in this community. For Grok I'm very sure it's a workaround, as I had quite something to do with it and this was explicit in my mind. It's not *only* a

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 12:53, Hermann Himmelbauer du...@qwer.tk wrote: My impression (from an external perspective) is that Zope Corporation did just that for Zope 2/3, but nowadays tries to give this role to the community. No, I don't think we ever tried that. I think we should. -- Lennart

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Hermann Himmelbauer
Am Dienstag 03 März 2009 00:48:38 schrieb Lennart Regebro: On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 00:16, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Who is going to make that decision to encourage this? Allow this? You? Me? Who? Right now, *nobody* is making such decisions and nobody can properly get

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 13:04, Roger Ineichen d...@projekt01.ch wrote: You can also call this anticipation the oposit of participation :) The big questions now is, do we like to merge this good things back to the zope core or do we like to stay with different packages because we can't find an

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Hermann Himmelbauer
Am Dienstag 03 März 2009 08:19:37 schrieb Lennart Regebro: On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 01:51, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Can you stop using the word committee? I didn't use it. A committee is a bunch of people who has regular meetings, behind closed doors, to make decisions.

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Pieters
I find this thread quite ironic. Martijn Faassen recognizes a problem, namely that there is no direction in Zope development. Instead, when ideas are put forth lots of people put in their oar with +1s and -1s and stop energy and cheer leading one direction or another. In the end the ideas either

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 13:33, Hermann Himmelbauer du...@qwer.tk wrote: Hmmm, I have the slight feeling that your opinions are not that far away. Of course not. This is, as aways, just a question of loudly agreeing. -- Lennart Regebro: Pythonista, Barista, Notsotrista.

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martin Aspeli
Martijn Pieters wrote: Would it be possible to focus this discussion around clearer lines? Create counter proposals if you have to, discuss things on their merits, but if you cannot add more than a vague +1 and -1, please refrain. I think that would be easier if we had a shorter proposal. I

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Gary Poster
On Mar 3, 2009, at 7:35 AM, Martijn Pieters wrote: ... And so far I haven't heard any better ideas than what Martijn is proposing (no, leaving the status quo, deny there is a problem and steer by majority is not a counter proposal in my view). It may be that the idea needs some tweaking,

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Paul Everitt
On 3/2/09 10:13 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote: We recognised that there was a problem in trying to make sure we represented the interests of various stakeholders, and that we needed someone to think big picture in terms of what technologies we adopted and how we used them. Just to be clear, I

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Paul Everitt
On 3/2/09 6:36 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote: Hi there, To people who are suggesting we don't need a steering group nor a name for the Zope Framework, please answer the following questions: * how will the community make hard decisions where lots of people disagree? What is the mechanism for

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Andreas Jung
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03.03.2009 14:45 Uhr, Paul Everitt wrote: In the past we've seen things like let's unify Zope by merging the Zope2 and Zope3 mailing lists get shot down by a couple of loud no votes. Loud no's have grown paralyzing. This topic is still

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Kent Tenney
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 6:24 AM, Hermann Himmelbauer du...@qwer.tk wrote: Am Dienstag 03 März 2009 00:48:38 schrieb Lennart Regebro: On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 00:16, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Who is going to make that decision to encourage this? Allow this? You? Me? Who?

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Andreas Jung
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03.03.2009 15:37 Uhr, Kent Tenney wrote: On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 6:24 AM, Hermann Himmelbauer du...@qwer.tk wrote: Am Dienstag 03 März 2009 00:48:38 schrieb Lennart Regebro: On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 00:16, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Paul Everitt
On 3/3/09 9:37 AM, Kent Tenney wrote: I'll chime in as a newbie. It seems many of the comments preferring ad-hoc to structure come from we know what we are doing, we can take care of ourselves I think Zope has the goal of attracting new users, and the proposal has potential to make Zope

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Kent Tenney
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 8:43 AM, Andreas Jung li...@zopyx.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 - Show quoted text - On 03.03.2009 15:37 Uhr, Kent Tenney wrote: On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 6:24 AM, Hermann Himmelbauer du...@qwer.tk wrote: Am Dienstag 03 März 2009 00:48:38

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Stephan Richter
On Monday 02 March 2009, Chris Withers wrote: Adam GROSZER wrote: Someone releases a new package version and your project just break the next day. That's a nightmare. That shouldn't happen with individual package releases where releases are done sensibly. Let me tell you from experience:

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martin Aspeli wrote: Tres Seaver wrote: snip - - How many need *all* of Zope3, including the ZMI? I'm betting that set is much smaller than either of the others? Probably none. So having better dependencies would obviously be good. I

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Stephan Richter
On Tuesday 03 March 2009, Martijn Pieters wrote: The irony is that the proposed solution, organized leadership, is going to suffer the same fate as the aforementioned ideas. Everyone is putting in their oar, +1s and -1s are flying right, left and centre, and this idea is either going to die,

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Stephan Richter wrote: On Monday 02 March 2009, Chris Withers wrote: Adam GROSZER wrote: Someone releases a new package version and your project just break the next day. That's a nightmare. That shouldn't happen with individual package releases

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martin Aspeli wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: What is going to make us more effective is: * a recognition of current reality, i.e. the Zope Framework is not the same as the Zope 3 application server and it serves a far wider audience. *

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hey, Tres Seaver wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martin Aspeli wrote: Tres Seaver wrote: snip - - How many need *all* of Zope3, including the ZMI? I'm betting that set is much smaller than either of the others? Probably none. So having better dependencies

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Chris Withers wrote: Adam GROSZER wrote: Someone releases a new package version and your project just break the next day. That's a nightmare. That shouldn't happen with individual package releases where releases are done sensibly. (ie: if you're going to do a big backwards-incompatible

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Stephan Richter
On Tuesday 03 March 2009, Lennart Regebro wrote: On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 09:21, Martin Aspeli optilude+li...@gmail.com wrote: If anything, we started out with too little process and found there were gaps we had to plug. Ah. Now, THIS I like. Let's focus on this: Start out with as little

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Stephan Richter
On Tuesday 03 March 2009, Tres Seaver wrote: Stephan, I *have* managed a large set, and I'm *certain* that the KGS is useful for many cases:  it just doesn't work for me for any large production application:  I don't want to rely on the iffy availability of eggs from PyPI, for instance, which

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Stephan Richter
On Tuesday 03 March 2009, Gary Poster wrote: My mild counter proposal was this. - The ZF formally institutes an easy way for people to start Zope   projects - Hopefully, Martijn F. starts something like the project he described - Hopefully, people follow it. In other words, I suppose,

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, Martin Aspeli wrote: [snip] I think Martijn is trying to address something that Zope has lacked for a while. I don't think it'll solve all of the world's problems, nor do I think that Martijn things so, but it will make some things - things like this very debate - a bit easier

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Christian Theune wrote: On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 02:35 +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote: * leadership could help sustain efforts like we want the Zope Framework to run on Jython and make detailed decisions based on this. Nobody right now can really decide on this. Anecdote: Our current Jython

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, Martin Aspeli wrote: [snip] You and I had a discussion a while back about forking the zope.component ZCML directives, and how it would've been better to work within the boundaries of the Zope packages so that everyone who wanted to lose the zope.security dependency could benefit,

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, Martin Aspeli wrote: [snip] I'm not sure Plone's model fits Zope perfectly, but certainly there are some lessons to be learned. We also have some of processes and documentation already in place, having made a few mistakes along the way. Definitely, I'm very interested in seeing

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, Lennart Regebro wrote: 1. Areas that need somebody responsible should get one. We need somebody to bug people about bugs in the bug tracker. That should be one person, for example. Responsibilities need to be well defined and individual. There isn't anybody called Someone here, so

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, Lennart Regebro wrote: [snip] No. The steering group should not have backroom discussions. They should act as open as possible. I think of it as a catalyst. The operative here is *should*. Compare that to *will*. These are different words. What the steering group *should* do and

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, Lennart Regebro wrote: [snip] As much as I prefer discussing with people in real life, there is the notion of no backroom conversations WRT to driving development of an open source project. OK. *Cough*. You and Martijn wrote this proposal. And you asked Stephan about it. You did

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Paul Everitt wrote: On 3/2/09 10:13 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote: We recognised that there was a problem in trying to make sure we represented the interests of various stakeholders, and that we needed someone to think big picture in terms of what technologies we adopted and how we used them.

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martijn Faassen wrote: Hi there, Tres Seaver wrote: [snip] Stephan, I *have* managed a large set, and I'm *certain* that the KGS is useful for many cases: it just doesn't work for me for any large production application: I don't want to rely

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Stephan Richter wrote: On Tuesday 03 March 2009, Tres Seaver wrote: Stephan, I *have* managed a large set, and I'm *certain* that the KGS is useful for many cases: it just doesn't work for me for any large production application: I don't want to

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hey Gary, [panarchist approach where we have people starting groups that could compete for attention] I agree that it should be relatively easy to start Zope projects under the Zope umbrella. I agree that such projects could compete for attention and may the best one win. I think this is

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hey, Stephan Richter wrote: [snip] Actually Martijn tried to be better than that. :-) Instead of just forming a steering group (which I would interpret as a Zope project) and announcing it to the community, he asked for feedback first. :-) Thanks. :) I probably agree he should have just

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Simon Michael
Boy, there's no point in trying to outrun this thread, I'd better just jump in here. Martin I think you said that very well and I'm convinced. I appreciate and generally support Martijn's proposal. When in doubt, I'd be in favour of emulating what's been shown to work in the Plone community - eg

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martijn Faassen wrote: Paul Everitt wrote: On 3/2/09 10:13 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote: We recognised that there was a problem in trying to make sure we represented the interests of various stakeholders, and that we needed someone to think big

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, Chris McDonough wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: Martin Aspeli wrote: [snip] You and I had a discussion a while back about forking the zope.component ZCML directives, and how it would've been better to work within the boundaries of the Zope packages so that everyone who wanted to

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Tres Seaver wrote: [snip] (though I did hear positive news about it). I do have the impression the framework team strategy works reasonably well; it's been operating for about 2 releases now? It works as a way of sharing the load with the release manager. Because its members don't feel

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Matthew Wilkes
On 3 Mar 2009, at 18:25, Martijn Faassen wrote: Ah, so Plone currently has long term direction as they think 2 releases ahead of just one? Plone 4 discussions are happening around now, there are demos of suggested concepts and people generally working on the codebase. Plone 5 is a

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 19:09, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote: Different participants will report differently about the success, no doubt.  One unexpected outcome (for some) was classifying the decisions taken at the PSPS as advisory, just talk, etc:  having no force in governing the

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Chris McDonough
Martijn Faassen wrote: Hi there, Chris McDonough wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: Martin Aspeli wrote: [snip] You and I had a discussion a while back about forking the zope.component ZCML directives, and how it would've been better to work within the boundaries of the Zope packages so

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Paul Everitt
On 3/3/09 2:42 PM, Chris McDonough wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: And you think it's all due to the brand... Yes! Someone who *wants* to use basic ZCML directives but doesn't want zope.security, zope.location, zope.publisher, zope.traversing, zope.i18n, and pytz can *already* use

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, Chris, I think you are misunderstanding my position quite dramatically. Perhaps you should calm down and reconsider what I've been saying, as I believe we're a lot closer than you seem to think. On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote: [snip] I'd rather

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, I thought I should highlight this characterization of the Zope project because I agree with much of it but also disagree with much of it. Chris McDonough wrote: I have no faith whatsoever that staying on the course we've been on for the last 9 years ( 9 years is a long time, and

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Hanno Schlichting
Martijn Faassen wrote: It might be we are able to establish a framework team without elections by just picking out the bunch of people who are interested in this. That's been the Plone approach to creating the framework team. Some people just decided to do it and didn't even bothered to ask

Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: zope.component/branches/tseaver-wo_zope_deferred/

2009-03-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Tres Seaver wrote: Log message for revision 97465: Branch removing zope.deferred. This checkin is the branch I had in mind when sketching out a non-CPython-only zope.component story today. Notes on the changes: - - The branch kills off both the

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.component/branches/tseaver-wo_zope_deferred/ Branch removing zope.deferred.

2009-03-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dan Korostelev wrote: 2009/3/4 Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com: Log message for revision 97465: Branch removing zope.deferred. Changed: D zope.component/branches/tseaver-wo_zope_deferred/src/zope/component/bbb/ -# BBB:

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.component/branches/tseaver-wo_zope_deferred/ Branch removing zope.deferred.

2009-03-03 Thread Dan Korostelev
2009/3/4 Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dan Korostelev wrote: 2009/3/4 Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com: Log message for revision 97465:  Branch removing zope.deferred. Changed:  D  

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.component/branches/tseaver-wo_zope_deferred/ Branch removing zope.deferred.

2009-03-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dan Korostelev wrote: 2009/3/4 Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dan Korostelev wrote: 2009/3/4 Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com: Log message for revision 97465: Branch removing zope.deferred.

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martin Aspeli
Chris McDonough wrote: Sorry, the you above in you scolded was Martin Aspeli, not Faassen. Note that the scolding had something to do with you breaking Plone trunk due to a transitive change in Chameleon, and the realisation that from this point on, any package shared between repoze.bfg and

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martin Aspeli
Tres Seaver wrote: Different participants will report differently about the success, no doubt. One unexpected outcome (for some) was classifying the decisions taken at the PSPS as advisory, just talk, etc: having no force in governing the more tactical decisions. I don't know why this

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Martin Aspeli
Martijn Faassen wrote: Okay, I guess we do differ here. I think a leader can provide encouragement and stimulate people into action, point out interesting outstanding tasks, and make sure that people who are motivated actually get grip on improving the project and don't get discouraged. Of

Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: zope.component/branches/tseaver-wo_zope_deferred/

2009-03-03 Thread Martin Aspeli
Tres Seaver wrote: - - The branch kills off both the use of 'zope.deferredimport' and the 'bbb' subpackage, leaving something which could be used in Jython, or IronPython, or the GAE. Why is zope.deferredimport a problem? Does it do something CPython specific? As a small utility, I don't

Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: zope.component/branches/tseaver-wo_zope_deferred/

2009-03-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martin Aspeli wrote: Tres Seaver wrote: - - The branch kills off both the use of 'zope.deferredimport' and the 'bbb' subpackage, leaving something which could be used in Jython, or IronPython, or the GAE. Why is zope.deferredimport a

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Gary Poster
On Mar 3, 2009, at 12:31 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote: Hey Gary, [panarchist approach where we have people starting groups that could compete for attention] [Had to look up panarchist, but yes, essentially.] I agree that it should be relatively easy to start Zope projects under the Zope

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Gary Poster
On Mar 3, 2009, at 10:57 AM, Stephan Richter wrote: On Tuesday 03 March 2009, Gary Poster wrote: My mild counter proposal was this. - The ZF formally institutes an easy way for people to start Zope projects - Hopefully, Martijn F. starts something like the project he described -

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Stephan Richter
On Tuesday 03 March 2009, Gary Poster wrote: FWIW, the only polish I'd love to see is static pages for past dev   releases (or did I miss them?) Well, it is a matter of version numbering, but all versions that have a unique version number are listed here: http://download.zope.org/zope3.4/ We

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Stephan Richter
On Tuesday 03 March 2009, Gary Poster wrote: We do have this system today. http://zope3.afpy.org/buildbot/waterfall Wow, great. Too bad about the failures.  How are you announcing the failures ATM? No, maybe someone can provide that service? ;-) BTW, I have decided not to go after the

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Chris McDonough
Martin Aspeli wrote: Chris McDonough wrote: Sorry, the you above in you scolded was Martin Aspeli, not Faassen. Note that the scolding had something to do with you breaking Plone trunk due to a transitive change in Chameleon, and the realisation that from this point on, any package

Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: zope.component/branches/tseaver-wo_zope_deferred/

2009-03-03 Thread Dan Korostelev
2009/3/4 Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com: - - Due to the 'test' extra, buildout pulls in a bunch of extra  dependencies, which I would like to zap (ZODB?  really?  just to  verify that the persistent registry survives 'dumps' and 'loads'?) - - 'setup.py test' needs 'zope.testing', but then

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Chris McDonough
Tather than reply in kind here, let me summarize: I'm glad we agree more than we disagree, and I apologize if I've attributed to you beliefs that you don't have. It's heartening to hear that you're in favor of most of the things I'm also in favor of. But we do have real differences in opinion I

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zope.component/branches/tseaver-wo_zope_deferred/ Branch removing zope.deferred.

2009-03-03 Thread Dan Korostelev
2009/3/4 Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com: Note that I'm not actually proposing that we merge this branch any time soon:  it is a bit of a straw man for the ongoing process conversation. Why not? It looks that it's just a dependency cleanup, so it can be merged (and released!) really soon

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Andreas Jung
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04.03.2009 7:52 Uhr, Chris McDonough wrote: Tather than reply in kind here, let me summarize: I'm glad we agree more than we disagree, and I apologize if I've attributed to you beliefs that you don't have. It's heartening to hear that you're

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 07:52, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote: Tather than reply in kind here, let me summarize:  I'm glad we agree more than we disagree, and I apologize if I've attributed to you beliefs that you don't have.  It's heartening to hear that you're in favor of most of the

Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project

2009-03-03 Thread Chris McDonough
Andreas Jung wrote: 2) I'm also not in favor of a giant lockstep set of software versions shared between notional releases Zope 3.5, Grok, and Zope 2.12. I can only see this as continuing our mistakes of old by trying to treat some collection of software as Zope as opposed to letting