Alan, does that address your concerns?
Just understand that the Five approach is still being developed, so there's nothing to "adopt" yet. :) But I certainly encourage folks to participate and help Martijn figure out what the approach should be.
Raphael, I think its great that Jim responded. Now we (collectively) need to get some usage out of Five.
Jim, Thanks for explaining ZC's position re: FrankenZope or backporting CA into Zope2. One of the big questions that I believe is open is how to use more of zope.app in Zope 2 - specifically Schema/Widgets. I heard that Zope Corp. is using this in some projects.
Note that FrankenZope is going to go for the new way of Interface integration last I heard (Five's way); the FrankenZope style setup to make interfaces work is not needed anymore since the changes to zope.interface that I did. This new approach works in straight 2.7.
I also heard rumors that FrankenZope's use of schema/widgets is actually an evolved branch of an earlier version of Zope 3. Five's mission is to integrate Zope 3 into Zope 2 as much a possible without having to change either. Of course this is not always possible, but it's an important goal. That said, I'm sure we could learn more from FrankenZope's experiences in that area if someone would to speak up about this.
So - I asked if people to do some CMF/Plone implementation of Views in certain aspects. I am up for creating a Supplement to Plone to bolts on some of the technologies and uses it. Maybe specifically using it for doing in-place versioning. I urge the communities to use Plone or maybe a fork of it (or the CMF) to be a playground. Like Idle forked to land some major features for Python. Then it can be integrated back into subsequent projects.
Such experimentation is definitely very welcome, and I'd also like to see some in the context of Five. I'd very much like to avoid more dilution of efforts where Five is going one way and CMF/Plone is going somewhere else.
That said, I'm certainly not going to be able to spend time on forking CMF and Plone and hacking on this myself. I do not know what a CMF version of Views would look like or even what its requirements could even be. It also sounds to me that forking Plone and/or CMF would be a far higher risk approach to integrating Zope 3 into Zope 2 than the approach Five is currently taking. Additionally of course I am not using CMF myself. :)
I'd urge people against getting too ambitious with this; I know high risk strategies can have higher payoff, but the chance that they fail is also higher. Five's strategy is baby steps and using the technology *right now*.
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce