On Nov 30, 2005, at 2:18 PM, Chris Withers wrote:
Gary Poster wrote:
Zope 2 depends on Zope 3, via Five. Zope 3 does not depend on
Zope 2.
A very good point, but one which makes me feel that Zope 2
shouldn't be merged in with Zope 3 ;-)
Actually, yes, all of my points were made to
Chris McDonough wrote:
I really, really appreciate Phil taking the time to propose this no
matter what happens.
Chris, I won't bother you with a detailed answer (esp. to some points that were
not quite
correct about Zope 3 not caring about backward compat). I just wanted to say
that I also
Jim Fulton wrote:
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
...
People keep telling Zope2 developers that the inclusion of Zope3
doesn't mean you have to touch it, if you don't use it it is just
inert code that won't cause any change in your Zope2 development style.
Hee hee. And they believed it? Do they
Chris McDonough wrote:
On Nov 24, 2005, at 8:37 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
I recall a slightly different discussion I was involved in. I
remember Zope 2 core developers worrying about the inclusion of Five
in Zope 2.8; they were worried they'd need to maintain its codebase.
I was one of
On Nov 24, 2005, at 6:42 AM, Stephan Richter wrote:
On Thursday 24 November 2005 01:39, Chris McDonough wrote:
- There doesn't seem to be as much of a commitment in the
Z3 community to backwards compatibility as
there is for Z2. Notes like Stephan's last one where
he says I have made
Paul Winkler wrote:
On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 11:03:35PM +0800, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
I'd love to participate in some sprints on these.
Me too.
PyCon Dallas 2006 is only 3 months away and would be a great opportunity
for such sprints. There's nothing about Zope here yet:
On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 06:59:46PM +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Cool to hear you're giving Five related talks. Is there any description
of these available online? (not that it's likely I'll be able to attend
PyCon, but I'm very curious)
http://wiki.python.org/moin/PyCon2006/Talks
They're
While I don't agree with the +1 voters, I understand and appreciate
their arguments. That said...
On Nov 23, 2005, at 6:49 PM, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
People keep telling Zope2 developers that the inclusion of Zope3
doesn't mean you have to touch it, if you don't use it it is just
inert
On Wednesday 23 November 2005 22:14, Gary Poster wrote:
The question here is effectively whether all Zope 3 developers must
become Zope 'Five' developers. As you said, Zope 2 developers can
choose to proceed essentially unaffected. Zope 3 devs could not.
Amen.
Regards,
Stephan
--
--On 24. November 2005 07:09:00 +0100 Morten W. Petersen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We are not even getting bug reports.
Likely because Zope 3 *just-works* :-)
-aj
pgpC8hG89OHHQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 04:56 +0100, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
I think Martin Aspeli is not the only one who still has no clue on how to
move forward
beyond a certain Fivization of his Zope 2 products. If you do, then that's
great, but I
don't think everyone is in that fortunate
11 matches
Mail list logo
