Hash: SHA1

Jim Fulton wrote:
> Thanks for posting this.  (Thank you too Chris for starting the Zope 4  
> thread.) Despite the inevitable bike shedding, I think this is a  
> discussion worth having.
> Here are my opinions, which build on the arguments you gave, even  
> though I disagree with some of your conclusions.
> 1. I hate "Zope Classic". It was a mistake for Coke and I think it  
> would be a mistake for us too. :)
> 2. I think Zope 3 the application should die.  It should go the way of  
> New Coke.
> 3. I think the word "Zope" should refer to both the application  
> currently called Zope 2 and the Zope ecosystem, depending on context,  
> although I'm also fine with coming up with another name as long as it  
> doesn't imply obsolescence. :)

Amen to all of that.

WRT the "Framework" name: "framework" is a misleading name for the
collection of packages salvaged from the "new Coke" effort:  it is
actually a *bunch* of frameworks, in the classic software engineering
sense, along with some "pure" libraries.

The notional "Zope Framwork" is alos *not* what other Python web
developers mean when they say "web framework":  Grok and BFG fit that
meaning.  Zope2 is really an "app server" / "pluggable application",
rather than a "web framework".

- --
Tres Seaver          +1 540-429-0999          tsea...@palladion.com
Palladion Software   "Excellence by Design"    http://palladion.com
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to