+1 on Jim's suggestion #2.
However, if I am understanding things correctly, it doesn't really sound
like door #2 entails a huge deviation from from our current course of
bringing Zope 2 and Zope 3 together gradually. I don't really care what
the converged product is called, be it Zope 2.250 or
On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 10:38:03 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
I think that the idea of giving Zed its own, distinct identity is great.
Zope 3 is a _huge_ overhaul and it needs to be obvious to the world that
it is dramatically better than crufty old Zope 2. Zope 3 then becomes the
Zed application
On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 20:39:54 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
Technology-wise:
[snip]
This, as far as I can see, is compatible with 99% of the visions we
have discussed here, and it will keep us busy for a year. :-)
I like your summary. It sounds consistent with both Jim's proposed vision
Jeff Shell has posted some thought-provoking pieces on his blog that are
relevant to Jim's recent attempt to better articulate a vision for Zope:
http://griddlenoise.blogspot.com/2006/03/zope-crisis-of-faith-coming-this-march.html
I am very glad to see that Jim's efforts to better articulate a vision for
Zope have generated so much interest. I am not so sure that the
discussion has been an entirely productive one.
I think that we as a community would benefit by working on our social
engineering as much as our software
