[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package
Troy Farrell wrote: ... I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade or slow the adoption of Zope 3. I, along with everyone here want to see this transition go smoothly. When the customer only notices the change due to new functionality, ease of use, or improved performance, then we will know that we have succeeded. This exactly the sort of feedback we need. Thanks. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Please pardon my slowness to respond. Zope is (still) not (yet) my full-time occupation. Jim Fulton wrote: | Troy Farrell wrote: |> |> Philipp, not everyone follows well-planned, ideal upgrade practices. | | There's only so much we can do for people who don't. Agreed. I'm mainly playing devil's advocate because we're moving into the realm where changes have consequences (unlike the legacy-free nature of Z3.) | I think your main point is people who skip updates. Perhaps, | I should have suggested keeping the legacy Zope package longer? I think you are right. |> Deprecation errors are nice, but usually admins take one of two | | Warning, not errors Yep, my mistake. |> approaches to |> them, neither of which is ideal: |> 1) Ignore them since everything seems to work alright |> 2) See the apocalypse horsemen headed their direction - this results in |> "URGENT!!! HELP ME PLAESE RIGHT NOW" email on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list. |> |> This will cause many a shock when the occasion for upgrade to 2.9 |> comes around. |> ~ At 2 A.M. | | Would you feel better if we kept the legacy support available longer? I see this in your email to Tres: - - We would not enable this by default in 2.9, Assuming that the note on enabling this in 2.9 is fairly easy to spot (README or ChangeLog or whatever is appropriate) that should be enough. I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade or slow the adoption of Zope 3. I, along with everyone here want to see this transition go smoothly. When the customer only notices the change due to new functionality, ease of use, or improved performance, then we will know that we have succeeded. Troy -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFAh2lPAykmMtO9ylMRAiWcAJ9dDp9QOwfSDcK/Ko+EYbfioSSyTwCdE0ZV CswY0tSqsUTKdKx1NT6prbo= =lbVr -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package
Troy Farrell wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: |> Troy Farrell wrote: |> |> -1 on alternative 4. This lurker is with Tres. This is a Z3 |> challenge. I wonder how many part-time Zope 2 admins will be happy |> about making this change and having to retest code they've inherited |> from some contract developer. | | Why would they switch to Zope 2.8 if not for the component architecture? | So, if you just "inherited" some code for maintainance, this will | unlikely break your program. In fact, it won't even break your program | when the rename is effective, since we'll keep a facade Zope package | around. Philipp, not everyone follows well-planned, ideal upgrade practices. There's only so much we can do for people who don't. Often, upgrades come when they can be had, and even more frequently when there is a security hole and the fix is only available for the latest version or two. I'm remembering this: http://securityfocus.com/bid/9400/ This was the occasion for my upgrade to 2.7, which proved to be a learning experience. Fortunately, I used a test instance for my upgrade :) I think your main point is people who skip updates. Perhaps, I should have suggested keeping the legacy Zope package longer? Deprecation errors are nice, but usually admins take one of two Warning, not errors approaches to them, neither of which is ideal: 1) Ignore them since everything seems to work alright 2) See the apocalypse horsemen headed their direction - this results in "URGENT!!! HELP ME PLAESE RIGHT NOW" email on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list. This will cause many a shock when the occasion for upgrade to 2.9 comes around. ~ At 2 A.M. Would you feel better if we kept the legacy support available longer? The deprecation warnings are a way for people to find out when somethings coming. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Why would they switch to Zope 2.8 if not for the component architecture? To stay current? To get MVCC? To get new-style extension classes, and thus access to many modern Python features. Later releases will provide benefits beyond just the Z3 features. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: |> Troy Farrell wrote: |> |> -1 on alternative 4. This lurker is with Tres. This is a Z3 |> challenge. I wonder how many part-time Zope 2 admins will be happy |> about making this change and having to retest code they've inherited |> from some contract developer. | | Why would they switch to Zope 2.8 if not for the component architecture? | So, if you just "inherited" some code for maintainance, this will | unlikely break your program. In fact, it won't even break your program | when the rename is effective, since we'll keep a facade Zope package | around. Philipp, not everyone follows well-planned, ideal upgrade practices. Often, upgrades come when they can be had, and even more frequently when there is a security hole and the fix is only available for the latest version or two. I'm remembering this: http://securityfocus.com/bid/9400/ This was the occasion for my upgrade to 2.7, which proved to be a learning experience. Fortunately, I used a test instance for my upgrade :) Deprecation errors are nice, but usually admins take one of two approaches to them, neither of which is ideal: 1) Ignore them since everything seems to work alright 2) See the apocalypse horsemen headed their direction - this results in "URGENT!!! HELP ME PLAESE RIGHT NOW" email on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list. This will cause many a shock when the occasion for upgrade to 2.9 comes around. ~ At 2 A.M. As for moving to CA, I'm trying it right now. I'm working through buddydemo and trying to wrap my head around the verbosity that is Zope 3. My plan is that starting mid-May, all new projects will be on Zope 3 sans the backward compatibility stuffs. My personal preference is for option 1 or option 3. Troy -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFAhnF8AykmMtO9ylMRAh31AJ9EmIAtssh9k/CiNFGGMMQRxK0WSACeIRms 1iq79Ikc982nJvp/X15oETE= =5Kuy -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package
On Tue, 2004-04-20 at 15:46, Fred Drake wrote: > On Tuesday 20 April 2004 12:08 pm, Jim Fulton wrote: > > What do people think about alternative 4? > > +1 Okay, add me to the chorus: +1 -Barry ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package
On Tuesday 20 April 2004 12:08 pm, Jim Fulton wrote: > What do people think about alternative 4? +1 -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. PythonLabs at Zope Corporation ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package
On Tue, Apr 20, 2004 at 12:08:03PM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: > What do people think about alternative 4? +1 Marius Gedminas -- Q: How many IBM CPU's does it take to execute a job? A: Four; three to hold it down, and one to rip its head off. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package
+1 Jim Fulton wrote: What do people think about alternative 4? ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package
On Tuesday 20 April 2004 12:08, Jim Fulton wrote: > What do people think about alternative 4? +1 Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package
On Tue, Apr 20, 2004 at 12:08:03PM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: | What do people think about alternative 4? +1. -- Sidnei da Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://awkly.org - dreamcatching :: making your dreams come true http://plone.org/about/team#dreamcatcher Debug is human, de-fix divine. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 )
