Good analysis Gary,

Though I would tend to see Zope3 as the umbrella and the various
projects (components) under it.  

Is there REALLY too much bad press vs. good press about Zope3?  

I don't think so.  I think inventing a new name ala, Zope Umbrella is a
bad thing.  Presenting Zope3 as the Zope Component Architecture is not a
bad thing.  But not consolidating on a specific brand *is* a bad thing. 

I believe that from an outsiders point of view; keeping the Zope3
moniker ties it to the legacy of and Zope Corp.  These are not
bad things.   Explaining that it is now a component architecture is a
good thing.  In my project, this received a very positive response  from
Python developers.  They liked the ideas of Zope but hated the
monolithic structure of Zope2.x

I am not a Zope developer, have never contributed a single line of code.
I have complained a lot, mostly because I misunderstood Zope.  but I can
tell you that as a user it is easy to see the power and functionality.
Even if I do not yet know how to fully exploit it.

Moving away from the name is bad for the FOSS product and bad for the
company that started it all.

My 2.5 cents,


Timothy Cook, MSc
Health Informatics Research & Development Services
LinkedIn Profile: 
Skype ID == timothy.cook 
*You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or   *
*from this link*

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

Reply via email to