I see no reason at all to rename anything.
remeber the days when there was dBase3. and then dBase4 came allong.
technically better but never took off ?
To the day things are either dBase or dBase3 compatible.
A simmilar situation we have with Zope.
Like dBase, Zope is a base technology. How its named is not (very)
important. Nobody but techies will be interested. And they quickly will
learn what the different bits in the tool-chest are used for. What ever
they are named.
Martijn Faassen schrieb:
> Okay, in the interests of making this discussion go quickly, there has
> been enough negative feedback about renaming Zope 2 to think we have no
> realistic chance of renaming it.
> We are still stuck with the following perceived sequence:
> Zope 2, Zope 3
> which implies that people should want to upgrade.
> How to get out of that bind? We could consider renaming Zope 3. Is there
> any potential for this?
> I'll note that I don't think there's as much at risk here:
> Zope 2, Zope 3, Zope Framework.
> This isn't a progression that people want to upgrade to either, but it
> may give the wrong impression.
> If we don't call Zope Framework "4.0", we'll be fine. We should call its
> first release 1.0 and there's no implication of a progression.
> Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
> ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
> (Related lists -
> http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -