On 3/3/09 2:42 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> And you think it's all due to the brand...
> Yes! Someone who *wants* to use basic ZCML directives but doesn't want
> zope.security, zope.location, zope.publisher, zope.traversing, zope.i18n, and
> pytz can *already* use repoze.zcml; the only thing they don't get here is the
If we change the word "brand" to "megaframework", things might become
Grok makes framework decisions based on getting value from the Zope 3
platform. "So what if our configuration language sucks in zope.location
and pytz, we needed it anyway in our megaframework!" This view likely
represents the (indeterminately sized) population of Zope insiders.
Repoze doesn't have fidelity to the Zope 3 megaframework as its goal.
"I asked for a configuration parser and you sucked in a security model,
WTF!!" As such, Repoze probably wants something more like
Zope-the-library than Zope-the-megaframework. This view likely
represents the (indeterminately sized) population of Zope skeptics.
Which group wins when there's a tie in the Zope Framework? It will be
interesting to see.
I think there's also a point about the "brand" related to how diluted
the word "Zope" has become, but that is a second point to the
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -