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 ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
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 pgpL2CrWnTW0b.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
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 ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
