Re: AW: [Zope-dev] AW: [Zope3-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
Stephan Richter wrote at 2007-10-6 13:40 -0400: > ... >I personally feel quiet offended to see Zope 3 degraded to a set of >components. Zope 3 in itself is also an application server; Zope 2, on the >other hand, is an application. Maybe, but then Zope 2 is an application with variants that are not recognizable as variants of the same application ;-) -- Dieter ___ 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: AW: [Zope-dev] AW: [Zope3-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
--On 6. Oktober 2007 13:40:46 -0400 Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Although you are a Zope component-only developer you can not ignore the dependent applications and framework. So you are saying I have to change Zope 3's story to cope with Zope 2's identity crisis? Honestly, degrading Zope 3 to a set of libraries and components is marketing poisoning for people deploying pure Zope 3 applications. Marketing 'Zope' to new people is one point. Doing "internal marketing" for Zope is another big problem. By "internal marketing" I mean the following: my major customer is one of biggest Zope 2 users in Germany. We use Zope in various large scale installations for internal apps, for portals, shops and have more 100K Zope 2 installations running on Windows Desktops alone in Germany. I am trying to promote Zope 3 technology since years within our big development department. And it always comes to discussions and misunderstandings as soon the terms Zope 2 and Zope 3 pop up (...is it compatible?...how can we integrate it with current apps?..and so on). It's not about degrading Zope 3 to whatever...it's basically about names and the reception of the term 'Zope'. Accidentally Jim brought up the same point within his posting today about what Zope 3 stands for. Zope 3 right now is both an application server and a set of components. Let's call the component part 'Zope components' and the app server part 'Bob'. How Grok? Grok does not compete with Zope app server since it has complete different name. We can tell the people "Grok is a framework for building webapps on top of Zope technology which implicit configuration etc...". With Zope 2 and Zope 3 we have always the problem answering "can I run my Zope 2 XXX software with Zope 3"...that's why we need a clear idea about what 'Zope ' means. You're right.this is about marketing - both to Zope developers and non-Zope developers...but a clear and consistent marketing is absolutely necessary since we compete with other frameworks. Zope is no longer the top dog within the world of Python frameworks. Andreas pgpMejJrK6usa.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ 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: AW: [Zope-dev] AW: [Zope3-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
On Saturday 06 October 2007 13:14, Andreas Jung wrote: > > You are using 7 times the term "Zope2" and 9 times "Zope 3" > > and also "Plone 3.0" in this small text. Can you try to describe > > this without "2 or 3" in "Zope *"? I guess not, right? > > s/Zope 2/Zope application server > s/Zope 3/Zope components I personally feel quiet offended to see Zope 3 degraded to a set of components. Zope 3 in itself is also an application server; Zope 2, on the other hand, is an application. > > I really don't care about how it is called, but I'm sure we > > need some naming convention and since we have one, I don't see > > any reason to change this. > > As said: there was a big discussion on the terms "Zope 2" and > "Zope 3" during the last DZUG conference. Bringing it to the point: > the terms "zope 2" and "zope 3" should die. There's only 'Zope'. I have not been involved in this discussion. Having discussions like this during a conference is good as a starting point, but should never be seen as a canonical decision. > Although you are a Zope component-only developer > you can not ignore the dependent applications and framework. So you are saying I have to change Zope 3's story to cope with Zope 2's identity crisis? Honestly, degrading Zope 3 to a set of libraries and components is marketing poisoning for people deploying pure Zope 3 applications. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ 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: AW: [Zope-dev] AW: [Zope3-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
--On 6. Oktober 2007 18:24:45 +0200 Roger Ineichen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Andreas What do you man by "two development paradigms"? Please don't build a wall between Zope 2 and Zope 3 developers. Most "old-school" Zope 2 developers are doing development also with Zope 3 components and Zope 3 techniques. Look at Plone 3.0 and its heavy usage of Zope 3 techniques...impressing. The Zope 3 development paradigms are highly accepted by most Zope 2 core developers...we are all sitting in the same boat. There is a fundamental difference in the Zope 2 and Zope 3 architecture but little difference between the paradigms how we should design and write software on top of the Zope platform in the future. The distinction between Zope 2 and Zope 3 must disappear. We must speak of "Zope". Everything else is counterproductive when it comes to promoting Zope. There is only one Zope developer community and most of us have a Zope 2 and a Zope 3 hat on (others have a CMF or a Plone head). An artificial separation between Zope 2 and Zope 3 developers is undesirable in my opinion. You are using 7 times the term "Zope2" and 9 times "Zope 3" and also "Plone 3.0" in this small text. Can you try to describe this without "2 or 3" in "Zope *"? I guess not, right? s/Zope 2/Zope application server s/Zope 3/Zope components I really don't care about how it is called, but I'm sure we need some naming convention and since we have one, I don't see any reason to change this. As said: there was a big discussion on the terms "Zope 2" and "Zope 3" during the last DZUG conference. Bringing it to the point: the terms "zope 2" and "zope 3" should die. There's only 'Zope'. You also use the term "Plone 3.0" which you implie that we know that you mean the Plone which uses Zope 3 components ? You are respecting the postifx 3.0 in the Plone world but not for Zope? why? Plone is an application but not a framework. Plone does not have an identify crisis as Zope. I'm a little confused and don't understand why you are lobbing for such a renaming and at the same time you are using this terms so heavy. Why? There are much, much more applications deployed on top of the Zope application server than on top of the Zope component architecture. There is a huge installation of Plone site on top of the Zope app server and now the Zope component framework. Although you are a Zope component-only developer you can not ignore the dependent applications and framework. The Zope application server core team is always in communication with the CMF and Plone teams (we play nicely together (mostly)) and I do expect the same within the Zope world. The merging of the lists is just one multiple steps for bringing the two side together. Andreas pgpJIhVXv45VR.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ 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 )
