Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-06 Thread Jake
That is a good set of ideas. Zope 2 installs into Zope 3. Jake http://www.ZopeZone.com "Zoping for the rest of us" On Feb 27, 2006, at 10:00 PM, Stephan Richter wrote: On Monday 27 February 2006 11:06, Lennart Regebro wrote: I like the vision of Zope2 becoming a set of extra packages you i

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-06 Thread Martijn Faassen
Jim Fulton wrote: [snip] I wasn't trying to define app server. I was describing the Zope app server. As long as you realize you do risk confusion even by saying 'Zope app server'. To me, Zope 3 is an app server, so when you say 'the Zope app server' will include its functionalities too. Re

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-05 Thread Jim Fulton
Martijn Faassen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: [snip] Sounds like the original vision of Zope 3 without the X. I thought we never got around to developing this stuff the last time. Actually, no. We originally said that we would provide a transition path. I said over an

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-05 Thread Jean-Marc Orliaguet
Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: [snip] I think that having one name for two radically different, though related, things is very confusing. There are really 2 main technologies that people care about: 1. The Zope app server. This is characterized by things like an

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-05 Thread Jim Fulton
Martijn Faassen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: [snip] I think that having one name for two radically different, though related, things is very confusing. There are really 2 main technologies that people care about: 1. The Zope app server. This is characterized by things like an object file system

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-05 Thread Jean-Marc Orliaguet
Rob Jeschofnik wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: I think a lack of a realistic vision means that we are pulling in different directions. I think this is causing a lot of harm. I think the crux of the issue here is that presently, we do not have a consistent answer to the question "What is `Zope'?"

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-04 Thread Rob Jeschofnik
Jim Fulton wrote: I think a lack of a realistic vision means that we are pulling in different directions. I think this is causing a lot of harm. I think the crux of the issue here is that presently, we do not have a consistent answer to the question "What is `Zope'?". I think what Jim is atte

[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions?

2006-03-04 Thread Rocky Burt
On Thu, 2006-02-03 at 16:49 +0100, Paul Everitt wrote: > I think Geoff's core point could be met by keeping the word "Zope" for > the app server. I think Geoff's deeper point was to rethink the word > used for the CA, which actually doesn't want to be thought of us an app > server. +1 -- Roc

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Jim Fulton wrote: [snip] I think that having one name for two radically different, though related, things is very confusing. There are really 2 main technologies that people care about: 1. The Zope app server. This is characterized by things like an object file system, through-the-web scripti

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: [snip] Sounds like the original vision of Zope 3 without the X. I thought we never got around to developing this stuff the last time. Actually, no. We originally said that we would provide a transition path. I said over and over that this was *not* g

Re: webdav locking (was Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions)

2006-03-02 Thread Gary Poster
On Mar 2, 2006, at 4:58 PM, Michael Kerrin wrote: Hi Gary, On Wednesday 01 March 2006 15:33, Gary Poster wrote: On Mar 1, 2006, at 10:13 AM, Michael Kerrin wrote: so it doesn't get to the locking tests (which will fail) but this is good thing to aim at :-) Hey Michael. What are you planni

Re: webdav locking (was Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions)

2006-03-02 Thread Michael Kerrin
Hi Gary, On Wednesday 01 March 2006 15:33, Gary Poster wrote: > On Mar 1, 2006, at 10:13 AM, Michael Kerrin wrote: > > so it doesn't get to the locking tests (which will fail) but this > > is good > > thing to aim at :-) > > Hey Michael. What are you planning to do with the locking stuff? > I'd l

[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions?

2006-03-02 Thread Martin Aspeli
On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 16:18:27 -, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Zope is a agile flexible extensible app server with rich services. You forgot "Enterprise". Martin -- (muted) ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions?

2006-03-02 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Benji York wrote: >> Good point. There's the question: Does this "zed" thing need a different >> name at all? If we want other people to pick it up, then it seems like a >> good idea to distinguish it from Zope-the-app-server. Paul seems to >> suggest that in his response. >> >> How about zopelib?

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions?

2006-03-02 Thread Benji York
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Good point. There's the question: Does this "zed" thing need a different name at all? If we want other people to pick it up, then it seems like a good idea to distinguish it from Zope-the-app-server. Paul seems to suggest that in his response. How about zopelib?

[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions?

2006-03-02 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Stefane Fermigier wrote: >>I think that the idea of giving Zed its own, distinct identity is great. > > I think it is stupid. > > We (Zope Corp + the Zope Community) have spent 8 years building the Zope > brand, and you want to restart from scratch ? Good point. There's the question: Does this "

[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions?

2006-03-02 Thread Jim Fulton
Paul Everitt wrote: ... People have it set in their brain that Zope is a monolithic web application server. Hard to dispel that meme. Yup. I'd rather adjust the meme to: Zope is a agile flexible extensible app server with rich services. :) Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTEC

[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions?

2006-03-02 Thread Paul Everitt
Geoff Davis wrote: 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

[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions?

2006-03-02 Thread Stefane Fermigier
Geoff Davis wrote: > Yes, and the use of the new name "Z" or "Zed" is a way to emphasize that > the Zed library is NOT a big, monolithic app server; rather, it's > something new and cool. > Zope 3 is new and cool. Or at least, let's spin it this way. Screencasts, podcasts, 14'59" wikis (quick

[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions?

2006-03-02 Thread Paul Everitt
Stefane Fermigier wrote: Geoff Davis wrote: I think that the idea of giving Zed its own, distinct identity is great.. I think it is stupid. We (Zope Corp + the Zope Community) have spent 8 years building the Zope brand, and you want to restart from scratch ? Hehe, poor Geoff. :) In the pas

[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions?

2006-03-02 Thread Geoff Davis
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 applic

[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions?

2006-03-02 Thread Jim Fulton
Geoff Davis wrote: +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, b

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions?

2006-03-02 Thread Stephan Richter
On Thursday 02 March 2006 10:29, Stefane Fermigier wrote: > Geoff Davis wrote: > > I think that the idea of giving Zed its own, distinct identity is great. > > I think it is stupid. Me too!! Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) We

[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions?

2006-03-02 Thread Stefane Fermigier
Geoff Davis wrote: > I think that the idea of giving Zed its own, distinct identity is great. I think it is stupid. We (Zope Corp + the Zope Community) have spent 8 years building the Zope brand, and you want to restart from scratch ? S. -- Stéfane Fermigier, Tel: +33 (0)6 63 04 12 77 (mobil

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Stephan Richter
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 11:12, Jim Fulton wrote: > What do you think the current roadmap is? I'm not sure we agree onwhat it > is. That's a huge problem. The current roadmap, as far as I understand it based on your comments and feedback from the community, is as follows: Primary objective --

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Lennart Regebro
On 3/1/06, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lennart Regebro wrote: > > Well, not neccesarily. Things change, and the plan for the future has > > not always been the same. The important part is that we work in the > > same direction. > > How is that possible if we don't communicate the vision

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Jim Fulton
Stephan Richter wrote: On Wednesday 01 March 2006 10:06, Jim Fulton wrote: I don't see how *saying* what Zope 5 will contain will make it *exist* any time sooner. You seem to be arguing against a roadmap, which is puzzling. I don't think Martijn is arguing against a roadmap, he just assert

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Stephan Richter
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 10:06, Jim Fulton wrote: > > I don't see how *saying* what Zope 5 will contain will make it *exist* > > any time sooner. > > You seem to be arguing against a roadmap, which is puzzling. I don't think Martijn is arguing against a roadmap, he just asserts (and ( agree wit

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Michael Kerrin
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 15:22, Sidnei da Silva wrote: > On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 03:13:29PM +, Michael Kerrin wrote: > | so it doesn't get to the locking tests (which will fail) but this is good > | thing to aim at :-) > > You can run it with '-k' (for 'keep going'). Cool - thanks for the hin

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Jim Fulton
Lennart Regebro wrote: On 3/1/06, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What's your point? That we shouldn't plan? That we shouldn't have a common vision for where we're going, or communicate that vision? Well, not neccesarily. Things change, and the plan for the future has not always been

webdav locking (was Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions)

2006-03-01 Thread Gary Poster
On Mar 1, 2006, at 10:13 AM, Michael Kerrin wrote: so it doesn't get to the locking tests (which will fail) but this is good thing to aim at :-) Hey Michael. What are you planning to do with the locking stuff? I'd like to see zope.locking (http://svn.zope.org/zope.locking/) used, rat

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Sidnei da Silva
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 03:13:29PM +, Michael Kerrin wrote: | so it doesn't get to the locking tests (which will fail) but this is good | thing to aim at :-) You can run it with '-k' (for 'keep going'). -- Sidnei da Silva Enfold Systems, LLC. http://enfoldsystems.com ___

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Lennart Regebro
On 3/1/06, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What's your point? That we shouldn't plan? That we shouldn't > have a common vision for where we're going, or communicate that > vision? Well, not neccesarily. Things change, and the plan for the future has not always been the same. The important

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Michael Kerrin
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 14:52, Stephan Richter wrote: > On Wednesday 01 March 2006 09:50, Michael Kerrin wrote: > > > First hit: > > > http://www.google.com/search?q=webdav+litmus+tests > > > > > > What you think about turning those into functional doctests? > > > > Never seen that before - foun

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Jim Fulton
Stephan Richter wrote: On Tuesday 28 February 2006 12:33, Martijn Faassen wrote: Are you kidding? No, I'm not kidding. +1 on the entire post from me too. And I would really like to see the questions he raised answered. OK, done. We just recovered from this BBB overpromise, What are

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Jim Fulton
Martijn Faassen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 17:29 +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: [snip] I see Zope 5 being a combination of Zope 2 and Zope 3, keeping the best of both. I think we already have Zope 5, and it's called Zope 2.9. Perhaps I'm wrong. If

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Stephan Richter
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 09:50, Michael Kerrin wrote: > > First hit: > > http://www.google.com/search?q=webdav+litmus+tests > > > > What you think about turning those into functional doctests? > > Never seen that before - found a bunch of bugs with it too :-) You ran it already? Regards, Stepha

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Michael Kerrin
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 14:32, Sidnei da Silva wrote: > On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 09:29:05AM -0500, Stephan Richter wrote: > | On Wednesday 01 March 2006 09:24, Sidnei da Silva wrote: > | > | Except that Michael Kerrins recent WebDAV work will shaddow Zope 2's > | > | support. If I understand his

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Stephan Richter
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 09:32, Sidnei da Silva wrote: > What you think about turning those into functional doctests? Of course a very, very big +1. :-) Though I woul split them up, so that we can only test features that we know we have implemented. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Ph

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Sidnei da Silva
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 09:29:05AM -0500, Stephan Richter wrote: | On Wednesday 01 March 2006 09:24, Sidnei da Silva wrote: | > | Except that Michael Kerrins recent WebDAV work will shaddow Zope 2's | > | support. If I understand his improved implementation correctly, then it | > | is very, very co

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Stephan Richter
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 09:24, Sidnei da Silva wrote: > | Except that Michael Kerrins recent WebDAV work will shaddow Zope 2's > | support. If I understand his improved implementation correctly, then it > | is very, very cool! > > Did you run the litmus tests against it? :) I don't know what th

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Sidnei da Silva
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 09:12:08AM -0500, Stephan Richter wrote: | On Tuesday 28 February 2006 11:00, Jim Fulton wrote: | > Zope 2 is more mature than Zope 3 in a lot of areas.  WebDAV | > and process management are a couple of examples that occur to me | > off the top of my head. | | Except that

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Stephan Richter
On Tuesday 28 February 2006 12:33, Martijn Faassen wrote: > > Are you kidding? > > No, I'm not kidding. +1 on the entire post from me too. And I would really like to see the questions he raised answered. We just recovered from this BBB overpromise, now we want to make another one. We also just

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-01 Thread Stephan Richter
On Tuesday 28 February 2006 11:00, Jim Fulton wrote: > Zope 2 is more mature than Zope 3 in a lot of areas.  WebDAV > and process management are a couple of examples that occur to me > off the top of my head. Except that Michael Kerrins recent WebDAV work will shaddow Zope 2's support. If I under

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-02-28 Thread Gary Poster
On Feb 28, 2006, at 12:33 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: Are you kidding? No, I'm not kidding. +1 to what Martijn said in this email (not quoting the whole thing to save precious bandwith). ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zop

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-02-28 Thread Martijn Faassen
Jim Fulton wrote: On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 17:29 +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: [snip] I see Zope 5 being a combination of Zope 2 and Zope 3, keeping the best of both. I think we already have Zope 5, and it's called Zope 2.9. Perhaps I'm wrong. If so, how does Zope 5 diffe

[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-02-28 Thread Martijn Faassen
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: I see Zope 5 being a combination of Zope 2 and Zope 3, keeping the best of both. I think we already have Zope 5, and it's called Zope 2.9. I'd rather say it's called Zope 2.15 or something :). Seriously, we are developing applicat

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-02-28 Thread Jim Fulton
On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 17:29 +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote: > Jim Fulton wrote: > > [snip] > > I see Zope 5 being a combination of Zope 2 and Zope 3, keeping > > the best of both. > > I think we already have Zope 5, and it's called Zope 2.9. > > Perhaps I'm wrong. If so, how does Zope 5 differ f

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-02-28 Thread Lennart Regebro
On 2/28/06, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Zope 2 is more mature than Zope 3 in a lot of areas. WebDAV > and process management are a couple of examples that occur to me > off the top of my head. Ah, and here I got an answer to the question I just posted. :) Much of Zope2 maturity is th

[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-02-28 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Martijn Faassen wrote: >> I see Zope 5 being a combination of Zope 2 and Zope 3, keeping >> the best of both. > > I think we already have Zope 5, and it's called Zope 2.9. I'd rather say it's called Zope 2.15 or something :). Philipp ___ Zope3-dev ma

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-02-28 Thread Martijn Faassen
Jim Fulton wrote: [snip] I see Zope 5 being a combination of Zope 2 and Zope 3, keeping the best of both. I think we already have Zope 5, and it's called Zope 2.9. Perhaps I'm wrong. If so, how does Zope 5 differ from Zope 2.9? Regards, Martijn

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-02-28 Thread Jim Fulton
On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 17:06 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote: > OK, some initial, fuzzy comments: > ... > You are thinking about things like TTW development and such? Among other things. Zope 2 is more mature than Zope 3 in a lot of areas. WebDAV and process management are a couple of examples th

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-02-28 Thread Alec Mitchell
On Tuesday 28 February 2006 00:22, Encolpe Degoute wrote: > Lennart Regebro a écrit : > | OK, some initial, fuzzy comments: > | > | On 2/27/06, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > |>2) In an alternate vision, Zope 2 evolves to Zope 5. > |> > |> - Zope 5 will be the application server generall

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-02-28 Thread Dmitry Vasiliev
Lennart Regebro wrote: I like the vision of Zope2 becoming a set of extra packages you install for Zope3, to get backwards compatibility. Maybe this is the same as what you call Zope 5, maybe not. +1 -- Dmitry Vasiliev (dima at hlabs.spb.ru) http://hlabs.spb.ru

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-02-28 Thread Encolpe Degoute
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Lennart Regebro a écrit : | OK, some initial, fuzzy comments: | | On 2/27/06, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: |>2) In an alternate vision, Zope 2 evolves to Zope 5. |> |> - Zope 5 will be the application server generally known as Zope. It |>

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-02-27 Thread Stephan Richter
On Monday 27 February 2006 11:06, Lennart Regebro wrote: > I like the vision of Zope2 becoming a set of extra packages you > install for Zope3, to get backwards compatibility. Maybe this is the > same as what you call Zope 5, maybe not. That would sound good to me!!! Regards, Stephan -- Stephan

[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-02-27 Thread Lennart Regebro
OK, some initial, fuzzy comments: On 2/27/06, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >In this vision, Zope 3 would have to become a lot more like >Zope 2, or we would lose features. You are thinking about things like TTW development and such? Because I see that as add-on products of differ