Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-22 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hey,

Roger Ineichen wrote:
 I think there is a little confusion about which package depends on
 each other.
 
 Right now there is a zmi.core package this package should
 contain core parts without to much dependency.  After that
 we need several zmi.* packages which are replacements for
 each zope.app.* package. right?

Right. Note that I'm against making too many zmi.* packages right now, 
keep it all in a few packages now.

Concerning dependencies, let's first talk about zope.container:

zmi should depend on zope.container

zope.app.container.browser should have backwards compatibility imports 
from zmi, and zope.app.container should depend on zmi

Now let's talk about a package that *hasn't* been factored away from 
zope.app.* yet, such as zope.app.file:

in this case, zmi would depend on zope.app.file but 
zope.app.file.browser would depend on zmi. That's a circular dependency, 
which we should break as soon as possible by moving zope.app.file's 
content objects to zope.file or something like that.

 I think it should be like:
 
 1. zope.app.foo moves ZMI code to zmi.foo
 
 2. zope.app.foo imports the zmi code from it's zmi.foo package

Agreed.

 This allows us to move the zmi code from the zope.app packages
 to zmi packages. Custom projects can then depend on zmi.foo
 and skip the dependency to zope.app.foo. (at least for the zmi)
 probably some zope.app.* packages contain only zmi code
 probably some contain other code like Martijn told with
 zope.app.form. That's fine and is not a part of our refactoring.
 
 Projects which depend on zope.app.foo and will use the latest code
 will get pulled in the zmi.foo package without any other dependecy
 and should just work without to change the project setup since the
 zope.app.foo package defines the zmi.foo dependency in thier
 setup.py file.

Agreed.

 btw,
 I think we should refactor the old menu implementaiton too
 ar at least review it since this part is very, very slow.
 But that's another part and could probably done after
 finishing the zmi refactoring part.

Agreed; do it after the zmi refactoring.

Thanks Roger for the coordination. I think we all agree on where we need 
to go, which is good.

Regards,

Martijn

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-22 Thread Yusei TAHARA
Hi,

On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:40:51 +0200
Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote:
  Or should we break BBB and let people know that they have to install
  zmi.core for zmi support? (I think so)
  
  I won't break BBB as much as possible, at least I'd like to keep persistent 
  data compatibility...
 
 But the ZMI is all views, right? What is persistent?
Yes, you're right. It's my mistake...We would not have any persistent data in 
zmi package.


  For now, I don't have clear image yet. I'm checking all zope.app.* packages 
  and make
  sure all tests pass. And maybe I will review current package dependencies.
 
 For that, you might want to investigate the z3c.recipe.depgraph recipe 
 to generate dependency graphs. To try it against trunks you need to add 
 them to 'develop' in your buildout.cfg
Oh I did not know that. Thanks.

Best regards,
-- 
Yusei TAHARA yu...@domen.cx
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-22 Thread Yusei TAHARA
Hi,

On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 09:48:40 +0200
Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote:

 Hey,
 
 Roger Ineichen wrote:
  I think there is a little confusion about which package depends on
  each other.
  
  Right now there is a zmi.core package this package should
  contain core parts without to much dependency.  After that
  we need several zmi.* packages which are replacements for
  each zope.app.* package. right?
 
 Right. Note that I'm against making too many zmi.* packages right now, 
 keep it all in a few packages now.
 
 Concerning dependencies, let's first talk about zope.container:
 
 zmi should depend on zope.container
 
 zope.app.container.browser should have backwards compatibility imports 
 from zmi, and zope.app.container should depend on zmi
 
 Now let's talk about a package that *hasn't* been factored away from 
 zope.app.* yet, such as zope.app.file:
 
 in this case, zmi would depend on zope.app.file but 
 zope.app.file.browser would depend on zmi. That's a circular dependency, 
 which we should break as soon as possible by moving zope.app.file's 
 content objects to zope.file or something like that.

I see, this is very clear.

BTW, what do you think of zope.app.form? As far as I know, it has some
basic interfaces like IInputWidget and IDisplayWidget, and they are used
by various packages. Then I don't see any reason to leave them under
zope.app.form. So, I think maybe we could also move them to zope.form or
somewhere generic package after we finish zmi package.

Best regards,
-- 
Yusei TAHARA yu...@domen.cx
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-22 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hey,

Yusei TAHARA wrote:
[snip]
 BTW, what do you think of zope.app.form? As far as I know, it has some
 basic interfaces like IInputWidget and IDisplayWidget, and they are used
 by various packages. Then I don't see any reason to leave them under
 zope.app.form. So, I think maybe we could also move them to zope.form or
 somewhere generic package after we finish zmi package.

I think we should consider reorganizing everything in zope.app.form 
(including zope.app.form.browser) at some point. The widgets in 
zope.app.form.browser could be called zope.formlibwidgets or something 
like that (better name would be nice). I'm not sure where the interfaces 
in zope.app.form should go though - zope.form sounds a bit generic, and 
there is a competing form framework in z3c.form - things might be 
confusing. Perhaps we can simply move these interfaces to zope.formlib?

zope.app.form.browser also contains the old ZML directives 
implementation to create forms using ZCML directivess, so we could leave 
them in zope.app.form.browser

Thanks for your feedback!

Regards,

Martijn

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-22 Thread Roger Ineichen
Hi Martijn
  
 Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams
 
 Hey,
 
 Roger Ineichen wrote:
  I think there is a little confusion about which package depends on 
  each other.
  
  Right now there is a zmi.core package this package should 
 contain core 
  parts without to much dependency.  After that we need several zmi.* 
  packages which are replacements for each zope.app.* package. right?
 
 Right. Note that I'm against making too many zmi.* packages 
 right now, keep it all in a few packages now.
 
 Concerning dependencies, let's first talk about zope.container:
 
 zmi should depend on zope.container
 
 zope.app.container.browser should have backwards 
 compatibility imports from zmi, and zope.app.container should 
 depend on zmi
 
 Now let's talk about a package that *hasn't* been factored away from
 zope.app.* yet, such as zope.app.file:
 
 in this case, zmi would depend on zope.app.file but 
 zope.app.file.browser would depend on zmi. That's a circular 
 dependency, which we should break as soon as possible by 
 moving zope.app.file's content objects to zope.file or 
 something like that.

Agreed, we should at the same time split the packages like
we did with others.

  I think it should be like:
  
  1. zope.app.foo moves ZMI code to zmi.foo
  
  2. zope.app.foo imports the zmi code from it's zmi.foo package
 
 Agreed.
 
  This allows us to move the zmi code from the zope.app 
 packages to zmi 
  packages. Custom projects can then depend on zmi.foo and skip the 
  dependency to zope.app.foo. (at least for the zmi) probably some 
  zope.app.* packages contain only zmi code probably some 
 contain other 
  code like Martijn told with zope.app.form. That's fine and is not a 
  part of our refactoring.
  
  Projects which depend on zope.app.foo and will use the latest code 
  will get pulled in the zmi.foo package without any other 
 dependecy and 
  should just work without to change the project setup since the 
  zope.app.foo package defines the zmi.foo dependency in 
 thier setup.py 
  file.
 
 Agreed.
 
  btw,
  I think we should refactor the old menu implementaiton too 
 ar at least 
  review it since this part is very, very slow.
  But that's another part and could probably done after finishing the 
  zmi refactoring part.
 
 Agreed; do it after the zmi refactoring.
 
 Thanks Roger for the coordination. I think we all agree on 
 where we need to go, which is good.

Yes, sounds good to me too

Yusei,
I'm out of the office till next monday. but I can
answer mails if you have questions.

Regards
Roger Ineichen

 Regards,
 
 Martijn
 
 ___
 Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
 **  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  ** (Related lists -  
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
  http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
 

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-21 Thread Yusei TAHARA
Hi Roger,

Thank you very much for your comment, and sorry for my late reply.
I did not receive your post I don't know why...

  Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams
  
  Hi,
  
  I just start working on maintaining ZMI and make it optional package.
  For now, it is easy to participate, just porting zope.app.* 
  (I already list up targets as directories in zmi.core) and 
  make sure that existing tests succeeds.
 
 Can you tell a little bit about what you mean with tests succeed?
 Should the test in the existing package succeed? But this whould
 mean that the old packages we move the zmi parts from needs to depend
 on the new zmi.core package.
 
 Should the old zope.app.* package depend on the new zmi.core package?
 (I think not)

No. But zmi.core might depend on zope.app.* packages.


 Or should we break BBB and let people know that they have to install
 zmi.core for zmi support? (I think so)

I won't break BBB as much as possible, at least I'd like to keep persistent 
data compatibility...


 If so, then the test should succeed in the new zmi.core packages, right?

Yes, my intention was to make sure that after we copy files from zope.app.* to 
zmi.core.*,
then existing tests which were originally in zope.app.* have to work in 
zmi.core.*.


 Can you write down some comment how we sould do the refactoring
 like:
 
 - move the zmi part from a zope.app.* package to
   the new zmi.core.* package.

Yes.

 - make sure the test pass in both packages. The zmi
   test should all get moved to the new zmi.core.* package
   Probably enhance the tests since the zmi part was not very 
   well tested.

Yes.

 - release the zmi.core package after each package move
   or at least before the zope.app.* package get released
 
 - bump up the zope.app.* package version (full not partial)
   e.g. 3.5.1 to 3.6.0

Hmm, I'm not sure yet...

 Not sure if the above is correct. Please change if not.
 It is at least only correct if we break BBB and move the zmi
 completly out of all zope.app packages to zmi.core.
 
 And probably we should also implement a testing layer setup
 which all test in zmi.core can share/use.

Sounds good idea.

For now, I don't have clear image yet. I'm checking all zope.app.* packages and 
make
sure all tests pass. And maybe I will review current package dependencies.
After that, I will copy zmi parts to zmi.core one by one. I'm sorry but I'm 
very slow
for some reasons, I cannot make an exact schedule yet.

Best regards,
-- 
Yusei TAHARA yu...@domen.cx
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-21 Thread Martijn Faassen
Yusei TAHARA wrote:
[snip]
 Should the old zope.app.* package depend on the new zmi.core package?
 (I think not)
 
 No. But zmi.core might depend on zope.app.* packages.

I think this should be avoided if we can. The idea is to lose the 
dependency of the zope.app.* packages for the ZMI, after all.

Of course there are exceptions: if you rely on a zope.app.* package that 
hasn't really been moved to zope.* yet (zope.app.form.browser for 
instance). But relying on zope.app.*.browser should be avoided in most 
cases, otherwise we create circular dependencies.

 Or should we break BBB and let people know that they have to install
 zmi.core for zmi support? (I think so)
 
 I won't break BBB as much as possible, at least I'd like to keep persistent 
 data compatibility...

But the ZMI is all views, right? What is persistent?

For BBB, you want the zope.app.*.browser packages to import from 
zmi.core, not the other way around. Otherwise we don't clean up 
dependencies at all.

[snip]
 - bump up the zope.app.* package version (full not partial)
   e.g. 3.5.1 to 3.6.0
 
 Hmm, I'm not sure yet...

I think this should be done; if you update a zope.app.* package to 
import its ZMI stuff from zmi.* a new release of the zope.app.* package 
should eventually be made, and it should have a new feature release (so 
increase y in x.y.z).

[snip]
 For now, I don't have clear image yet. I'm checking all zope.app.* packages 
 and make
 sure all tests pass. And maybe I will review current package dependencies.

For that, you might want to investigate the z3c.recipe.depgraph recipe 
to generate dependency graphs. To try it against trunks you need to add 
them to 'develop' in your buildout.cfg

 After that, I will copy zmi parts to zmi.core one by one. I'm sorry but I'm 
 very slow
 for some reasons, I cannot make an exact schedule yet.

I don't think you're slow at all. Your plan sounds good and I'm glad you 
have Roger giving you feedback.

Regards,

Martijn

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-21 Thread Roger Ineichen
Hi Martijn, Yusei

I think there is a little confusion about which package depends on
each other.

Right now there is a zmi.core package this package should
contain core parts without to much dependency. After that
we need several zmi.* packages which are replacements for
each zope.app.* package. right?

I think it should be like:

1. zope.app.foo moves ZMI code to zmi.foo

2. zope.app.foo imports the zmi code from it's zmi.foo package


This allows us to move the zmi code from the zope.app packages
to zmi packages. Custom projects can then depend on zmi.foo
and skip the dependency to zope.app.foo. (at least for the zmi)
probably some zope.app.* packages contain only zmi code
probably some contain other code like Martijn told with
zope.app.form. That's fine and is not a part of our refactoring.

Projects which depend on zope.app.foo and will use the latest code
will get pulled in the zmi.foo package without any other dependecy
and should just work without to change the project setup since the
zope.app.foo package defines the zmi.foo dependency in thier
setup.py file.


btw,
I think we should refactor the old menu implementaiton too
ar at least review it since this part is very, very slow.
But that's another part and could probably done after
finishing the zmi refactoring part.

Regards
Roger Ineichen


 Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams
 
 Yusei TAHARA wrote:
 [snip]
  Should the old zope.app.* package depend on the new 
 zmi.core package?
  (I think not)
  
  No. But zmi.core might depend on zope.app.* packages.
 
 I think this should be avoided if we can. The idea is to lose 
 the dependency of the zope.app.* packages for the ZMI, after all.
 
 Of course there are exceptions: if you rely on a zope.app.* 
 package that hasn't really been moved to zope.* yet 
 (zope.app.form.browser for instance). But relying on 
 zope.app.*.browser should be avoided in most cases, otherwise 
 we create circular dependencies.
 
  Or should we break BBB and let people know that they have 
 to install 
  zmi.core for zmi support? (I think so)
  
  I won't break BBB as much as possible, at least I'd like to 
 keep persistent data compatibility...
 
 But the ZMI is all views, right? What is persistent?
 
 For BBB, you want the zope.app.*.browser packages to import 
 from zmi.core, not the other way around. Otherwise we don't 
 clean up dependencies at all.
 
 [snip]
  - bump up the zope.app.* package version (full not partial)
e.g. 3.5.1 to 3.6.0
  
  Hmm, I'm not sure yet...
 
 I think this should be done; if you update a zope.app.* 
 package to import its ZMI stuff from zmi.* a new release of 
 the zope.app.* package should eventually be made, and it 
 should have a new feature release (so increase y in x.y.z).
 
 [snip]
  For now, I don't have clear image yet. I'm checking all zope.app.* 
  packages and make sure all tests pass. And maybe I will 
 review current package dependencies.
 
 For that, you might want to investigate the 
 z3c.recipe.depgraph recipe to generate dependency graphs. To 
 try it against trunks you need to add them to 'develop' in 
 your buildout.cfg
 
  After that, I will copy zmi parts to zmi.core one by one. I'm sorry 
  but I'm very slow for some reasons, I cannot make an exact 
 schedule yet.
 
 I don't think you're slow at all. Your plan sounds good and 
 I'm glad you have Roger giving you feedback.
 
 Regards,
 
 Martijn
 
 ___
 Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
 **  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  ** (Related lists -  
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
  http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
 

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-19 Thread Roger Ineichen
Hi

 Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams
 
 Hi,
 
 I just start working on maintaining ZMI and make it optional package.
 For now, it is easy to participate, just porting zope.app.* 
 (I already list up targets as directories in zmi.core) and 
 make sure that existing tests succeeds.

Can you tell a little bit about what you mean with tests succeed?
Should the test in the existing package succeed? But this whould
mean that the old packages we move the zmi parts from needs to depend
on the new zmi.core package.

Should the old zope.app.* package depend on the new zmi.core package?
(I think not)

Or should we break BBB and let people know that they have to install
zmi.core for zmi support? (I think so)

If so, then the test should succeed in the new zmi.core packages, right?

Can you write down some comment how we sould do the refactoring
like:

- move the zmi part from a zope.app.* package to
  the new zmi.core.* package.

- make sure the test pass in both packages. The zmi
  test should all get moved to the new zmi.core.* package
  Probably enhance the tests since the zmi part was not very 
  well tested.

- release the zmi.core package after each package move
  or at least before the zope.app.* package get released

- bump up the zope.app.* package version (full not partial)
  e.g. 3.5.1 to 3.6.0

Not sure if the above is correct. Please change if not.
It is at least only correct if we break BBB and move the zmi
completly out of all zope.app packages to zmi.core.

And probably we should also implement a testing layer setup
which all test in zmi.core can share/use.


Regards
Roger Ineichen
_
END OF MESSAGE

 Best regards,
 --
 Yusei TAHARA yu...@domen.cx
 ___
 Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
 **  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  ** (Related lists -  
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
  http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
 

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-18 Thread Yusei TAHARA
Hi,

On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:09:05 +0200
Fabio Tranchitella kob...@kobold.it wrote:

 To be honest, zope3 (as it is today) is a nice platform for me and for my
 company to build web applications (and, in general, the ZCA is a nice
 platform for building not-only-web applications), and it would be a shame
 to loose it.

ZCA will be improved by ZTK, so I don't worry.

 To make explicit: I am not talking just about maintaining the ZMI, I'm
 talking about making zope3 a *real* user-friendly web framework, as (for
 example) grok is already right now.

For me, my main purpose is maintaing the ZMI as an application server on ZTK,
because I find it still useful for maintenance/configuration on the spot for 
example. But making Zope3(though it is still ambiguous for me)/ZTK user-
friendly sounds a very nice idea. I could imagine a lot of packages might
makes beginners shrink a bit, although we already have nice books.

Best regards,
-- 
Yusei TAHARA yu...@domen.cx
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-18 Thread Yusei TAHARA
Hi,

I just start working on maintaining ZMI and make it optional package.
For now, it is easy to participate, just porting zope.app.*
(I already list up targets as directories in zmi.core) and make sure
that existing tests succeeds.

Best regards,
-- 
Yusei TAHARA yu...@domen.cx
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-17 Thread Lacko Roman
Hi

 From: zope-dev-boun...@zope.org [mailto:zope-dev-boun...@zope.org] On Behalf
 
 To be honest, zope3 (as it is today) is a nice platform for me and for my
 company to build web applications (and, in general, the ZCA is a nice
 platform for building not-only-web applications), and it would be a shame
 to loose it.

Agreed that ZCA has great pottencial to be used as not-only-web-framework
I have used ZCA+ZODB successfully in some desktop only projects

Roman

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-17 Thread Fabio Tranchitella
Hello there,

* 2009-04-16 09:44, Martijn Faassen wrote:
 Just so we don't lose track of who are interested in maintaining Zope 3
 (and/or the ZMI). I've distilled the following list of people who are
 interested in helping maintain Zope 3. This might mean making sure
 existing apps work, maintaining or replacing the ZMI, and working on
 making sure installation works. We can work out these details over time.

I've just checked out that the domain zope3.org is not owned by the Zope
Corporation. Do you have any idea about it? Would it be possible to claim
it back?

I'm thinking about taking over maintenance of zope3 in the wider term (not
only maintaining the code, but also the community around it).

To be honest, zope3 (as it is today) is a nice platform for me and for my
company to build web applications (and, in general, the ZCA is a nice
platform for building not-only-web applications), and it would be a shame
to loose it.

To make explicit: I am not talking just about maintaining the ZMI, I'm
talking about making zope3 a *real* user-friendly web framework, as (for
example) grok is already right now.

Thanks.

-- 
Fabio Tranchitella http://www.kobold.it
Free Software Developer and Consultant http://www.tranchitella.it
_
1024D/7F961564, fpr 5465 6E69 E559 6466 BF3D 9F01 2BF8 EE2B 7F96 1564
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-17 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hey Fabio,

Thanks again for coming back on this, this is quite encouraging.

Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
 I've just checked out that the domain zope3.org is not owned by the Zope
 Corporation. Do you have any idea about it? Would it be possible to claim
 it back?

I don't know, unfortunately.

 I'm thinking about taking over maintenance of zope3 in the wider term (not
 only maintaining the code, but also the community around it).

I might've missed your statement on this before, but do you think you 
could work with a renamed Zope 3? The same technology but with a 
different name? We could easily create a 'foo.zope.org' for it just like 
we have 'grok.zope.org', or we could of course start with a new domain name.

I think a fresh take on Zope 3 would help focus the efforts as well, and 
perhaps dumping the conceptual baggage would help attract new users and 
developers. But this discussions is fraught with danger. :)

 To be honest, zope3 (as it is today) is a nice platform for me and for my
 company to build web applications (and, in general, the ZCA is a nice
 platform for building not-only-web applications), and it would be a shame
 to loose it.

The ZCA is well in hand and I hope it's going to do better than ever, 
managed as part of the Zope Toolkit project. I hope we'll eventually 
gain improved documentation describing it too, right there on zope.org.

  To make explicit: I am not talking just about maintaining the ZMI, I'm
  talking about making zope3 a *real* user-friendly web framework, as
  (for example) grok is already right now.

Very cool! So, what about the name? Open to a change?

Regards,

Martijn

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] People in the Zope 3 and ZMI teams

2009-04-16 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there,

Just so we don't lose track of who are interested in maintaining Zope 3 
(and/or the ZMI). I've distilled the following list of people who are 
interested in helping maintain Zope 3. This might mean making sure 
existing apps work, maintaining or replacing the ZMI, and working on 
making sure installation works. We can work out these details over time.

I've sorted it all more or less in the order of perceived commitment, 
based on my statements and wild guesses on my part, I might be 
completely wrong.

If you want to help, please reply to this thread and indicate your support.

I'd suggest if you want to help you talk to the people nearer to the top 
of the list. But what typically works better is for the people on this 
list to tell zope-dev what they're doing, and how others could help them 
with particular bits, on a regular basis.

Yusei TAHARA


Concerning the ZMI:

For me, the ZMI is useful to managing local components, security 
settings, making views for ad hoc changes etc. I think it could be an 
optional package like grokui.admin. I'm interested in maintenance it.

I'll note that Yusei is planning to start work on rearranging the ZMI 
into a smaller set of packages (by moving code into zmi.core) soon. 
Please help him if you're interested!

Fabio Tranchitella
--

If the question was who is interested in zope3, the application 
server, and willing to maintain it, I'd answer me.

Concerning the ZMI:

We use the ZMI to manage applications, where applications are instances 
of a content object stored in the ZODB. All in all, we manage 
applications in a similar way we manage plone sites in zope2.x.

If this specific feature is going to be removed, I'm willing to support 
and maintain it.

Uli Fouquet
---

On a UI for installation of apps, possibly to be shared inside the Zope 
Toolkit: I'd be willing to help

He adds: although I don't feel qualified enough to drive such a process.

Stephan Richter
---

I have no problem keeping the Zope 3 KGS releases alive.

Concerning the ZMI: I have not used the
ZMI since 2 years now and I am still considering myself writing Zope 3 
apps.

Concerning a documentation website for Zope 3: I am not interested 
about that.

Albertas Agejevas
-

I'm very interested that existing applications that use the the 
zope.app server remain usable with future versions of Zope Toolkit 
libraries, or Zope 3 KGS if you will.

He also adds: I'm not interested in documentation or maintaining the 
installation story on any platform, that is attracting new users

Roger Ineichen
--

I'm willing to help to find a way to move the old code
parts to a newer and better concept.

Roger also says he's interested in maintaining the ZMI in some form or 
find something new to migrate to. I will help to support such a Zope 
Toolkit management app which will allow to get rid of the zmi part.

I'm not sure what he means with the old code

He adds: Note, I don't use this code in my own projects and I don't
propose to do that just for fun. But if someone proposes
to do it, I'm willing to help.

Baiju M
---

I am interested to maintain
the packages necessary to create a simple application out of the box.

He adds: This is just an academic interest  :)

Regards,

Martijn

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )