Christian Theune wrote:

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 01:10:19PM +0200, Martijn Faassen wrote:
I'm on the fence on this one. I think as long as the site *says* it's
affiliated with the Zope project, the Zope community and the
foundation, we're fine. You can argue both directions here: we might
even *help* send the message to people that the Zope community is
actually serious about providing stuff useful to outsiders.

I propose we let the naming discussion rest for now given the
arguments have been made. The most important thing is the creation of
a website.


I still have the feeling we should spend time getting our story straight. For
example: Why is "zc.buildout" a "Zope project"? The new site starts talking
about the "Zope libraries" which people started getting confused about. When
is something "Zope"?

My attempt at straightening the story is here:

If people disagree with that story, let's start a new thread and talk about it. Fast.

I'm not sure zc.buildout really is a "Zope project" at all. It's a Jim project, not a Zope project. However, it is largely maintained and used by the Zope community and we may have a decent place to put it and give it at least its own logo and some documentation space. If someone wants to build a separate website for zc.buildout, then that'd be great, but if the new lowers the impedance, I'd be happy to have a folder for it there. :)


Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See

Zope-Dev maillist  -
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - )

Reply via email to