-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I think trying to come up with a list of applications that "will break" is utopian. We're not talking "locked-down walled garden" here where the vendor has control over what the customer runs. We cannot anticipate what will break, apart from very high-level (and thus not all that helpful) statements like "sorry, CMF 1.3 probably won't run on Zope 2.10". The possible software combinations out there are limitless.


The list not be exhaustive or prescriptive. If all core components and "commonly used" products are not broken then making this known is helpful. Sorry, I'm just getting into the CMF otherwise I might have been able to make a more detailed suggestion.

But what do you define as "core components" or "commonly used products"? Obviously all those pieces that are part of the CMF tarball will have been tested and known to work with Zope 2.10. The same is true for Plone 3.0.

Keep in mind that coming up with this "commonly used software" list and then actually testing it requires time and effort. Are you volunteering? And how exactly would you test? There's tons of products out there that have no tests at all, and a lot where tests exist but don't even run out of the box. But then again unit tests may not provide a good picture, anyway, where the authors don't provide good test coverage or wrote bad tests. So now you'd have to click around to manually test all functionality.

I'm also concerned that any attempt by the CMF team to identify such software would backfire in general. People would want to know why "their" software is not listed. Listing a package also implies some responsibility, and I personally refuse to guarantee that any third party product not under my control does or does not work. Certifying that it does work is the responsibility of those packages' authors, not a Zope or CMF developer/release manager job. I will always stand behind a guarantee that released stable CMF versions and their listed dependencies work together, no problem.


As far as that Windows installer goes, that dicussion belongs on zope-dev or zope@zope.org, where you will get the standard answer: "Sorry, no one has stepped up to do this yet, would you like to volunteer?".

I know. I was referring obliquely to the fact that Zope 2.10 probably has not been tested as much as it should have been to be considered a stable version.

My personal opinion: I disagree with that statement. And not having a Zope 2.10 Windows installer would not be any obstacle to releasing CMF 2.1, at least in my view.

jens


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFFSLQsRAx5nvEhZLIRAgN6AJ9AL46N58H/LbhrzfFFCQddeK8uDwCfaoki
v7tGfT77xdmMFIboH9ZwJUc=
=bMin
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Zope-CMF maillist  -  Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf

See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests

Reply via email to