[Zope3-Users] Re: [Zope] Re: The Zope Software Certification Program and Common Repository Proposal

2006-02-21 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Andrew Milton wrote: +---[ Philipp von Weitershausen ]-- | Andrew Milton wrote: | +---[ Stephan Richter ]-- | | Hello everyone, | | | | With the development of Zope 3, the Zope developers committed to a new | | development process and

[Zope3-Users] Re: [Zope] Re: The Zope Software Certification Program and Common Repository Proposal

2006-02-21 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Andrew Milton wrote: +---[ Philipp von Weitershausen ]-- | | Handing over ownership to the ZF and therefore having signed a | Contributor Agreement are the terms of the svn.zope.org repository, just | like that code is to be made ZPL. The license part is irrelevant

[Zope3-Users] Re: [Zope] Re: The Zope Software Certification Program and Common Repository Proposal

2006-02-21 Thread Stephan Richter
On Monday 20 February 2006 23:55, Andrew Milton wrote: Wow, you took the following two quotes out of context. block quote The Common Repository is *not* a replacement for other high-level repositories like Plone's or ECM's. It does not aim at assimilating everything in the wider Zope

[Zope3-Users] Re: [Zope] Re: The Zope Software Certification Program and Common Repository Proposal

2006-02-21 Thread Stephan Richter
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 03:57, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Putting stuff into svn.zope.org *does* have advantages: * it's easy to feed packages upstream to Zope for a later inclusion into a Zope distribution. * putting a project/package under the wings of the ZF ensures long-term

[Zope3-Users] Re: [Zope] Re: The Zope Software Certification Program and Common Repository Proposal

2006-02-21 Thread Stephan Richter
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 07:15, Andrew Milton wrote: The proposal currently requires 3rd party code to be handed over to Zope Foundation[1] AND checked into the ZF svn repository in order to be 'certified'. You indicated this was indeed the case. That's not true. Phillip and I both negated