Chris Withers wrote:
Dieter Maurer wrote:
Let a bug occur in some component and then, instead (or in addition)
of fixing the bug, we say often: rip the component off Zope.
That was threadened for "Version"s, and "ZClass"es and now
Well, they all don't work right, confuse people are aren't maintained,
or a combination of all three. I'm sure if people who cared about them
were willing to work on them (ie: you!) then they might have stayedin
ZClasses are still in the core and versions are supported to some
level. (I wasn't aware that the refresh thing was in the core. Is it?)
but your refusal to sign a contributor agreement means there
Dieter has his reasons, which he has explained. I'm hopeful that
he will sign the new Zope Foundation contrinutor's agreement.
> Unsupported code is dead code, and unless it needs zero
maintenance, which isn't true for any of the above, then it has no place
being in the core...
Yup, OTOH, dropped features and backward incompatibility isn't so good.
This is why we should be very selective about what we put in. (Of course,
we'll still get it wrong from time to time.) Hopefully,
one of these days, we (including the Python community) will figure out
package management so that add-ons are easier to install and we don't have
to nail everything into the "core" (whatever that is ;) of either Zope
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714 http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org