On Thursday 25 October 2001 01:39, Chuck Esterbrook wrote: <SNIP - and SHUFFLE> > >I think there should be a formal plan to deal with these > >ideas. It should address and prioritize the following: > > We'll do some outlining, but I think there is enough > laundry items to go after 0.6.1 without formalizing a big > plan for 1.0. Short term fixes and badly needed > refinements are the highest priority. > > After 0.6.1, we can incorporate some of the major ideas > being tossed about for a 0.7 release. .... > In the main project, I would like to focus our limited > resources more sequentially. 0.6, followed by 0.6.1 and > various enhancements listed above in 0.7, etc. A few > solid deliveries will help us much more than 6 concurrent > subprojects which are all too immature to use in real > sites.
Agreed. That said, a very visible TODO list makes it clear how people can contribute in both the short and long-term. It highlights where patches, docs, and thought are needed. It also makes delegation easier and could take some of the load off you. It sounds like 0.6 is just around the corner. Many of the people who have nothing solid to contribute to 0.6 have thoughts (and code) on those ideas we just listed and might like to contribute to the 0.7 work. (http://dev.zope.org/Resources/ZopeRoadmap.html sums up my argument well) You mentioned 'separate community efforts' several times in your reply. This makes sense, but we need some sort of vehicle or forum to guide these efforts and prevent them from being lost in the ether. It needs to provide structure, continuity and a process for collaboration. The email lists are simply not adequate for this task. The 3rd party page is a good start, but it doesn't encourage collaboration. Python uses SIGS with communication via email lists and PEPs. Zope uses 'projects' with communication via wikis. Both approaches have worked wonderfully in some cases and failed miserably in others. I feel some time invested now in setting up something similar for Webware will pay off big-time on the way to 1.0. What do people think?? Does anyone have experience setting up a wiki? What other options are there? Clearly, this would fall into the 'separate community effort' category and should function without requiring effort from you (Chuck). There's enough people floating around here that it shouldn't be too difficult to find some volunteers to steer this. > The largest project for 1.0 is an automated regression > test suite for WebKit. Ah, forgotten about that one. I agree! Use of unittest has been a huge blessing for Cheetah dev. This is something that could proceed independently of the main Webware coding and would also be beneficial to Webware users developing their own applications. I think I've convinced Steve Purcell to change the license of his HTTPSession.py from the GPL to a Python/Webware style one so it can be used here. What were your concerns about the structure of the package again? > >** implementing some form of the multi-application idea > >that Jay and I have been working on > > 0.7 > > And don't forget my ideas, too. ;-) What are they??? :-) You were going to post your notes at one stage. > I'm thinking of 2 distro's in the future: > > - Webware for Python: contains only what's in Webware > CVS. What we do now. > > - Webware Deluxe: Contains the usual Webware plus > hand-selected valuable packages like Cheetah, MySQLdb, > etc. For the person who wants a complete web dev package > out of the box (e.g., .tar) containing only stable, > documented packages than can work together. Good idea! Standard vs Batteries-Included. Cheers, Tavis _______________________________________________ Webware-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss
