-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 14 Jun 2006, at 09:44, Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 14. Juni 2006 07:32:42 +0100 Chris Withers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I know the good reasoning behind the time-based releases, but have
really worked out?
Yes and No.
Yes: It's a must to have Zope 2 and Zope 3 in sync. Zope 2
development got a some more momentum again..
No: Half a yr is a short time. Major changes happened right short
before the first beta release. Not all Zope users won't follow this
fast release cycle.
Yes, the 6 month cycle is very short. All of a sudden we have a
situation where a whole slew of releases/branches is out there (2.7,
2.8, 2.9, 2.10, trunk) and I bet *no one* can say what's really
supposed to be supported and what isn't. And if someone fixes a bug
and wants to do "the right thing" by fixing it everywhere the effort
keeps on growing.
I think the 6 month number was picked as a good first guess how best
to handle the new release process, and IMHO we should look at that
again and adjust it.
For me, the fact that Zope 2.9.3 still emits
deprecation warnings on a fresh install (zLOG...) is a pretty bad
I think this is a dead horse now. Some things were deprecated without
actually converting all instances where the deprecated code was in
use. It's in your power to do something about it, go ahead.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -