-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> 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.
> Does it? There's precedence for systems where n and n+1 does not
> represent a linear upgrade path.
> The '3' says more "if you're starting afresh, this is where you want to
> start". I think that's still a correct statement.
Nope. There is no point in treating the two as equivalent choices at
this point. Nobody cares about the Z3 equivalent to Z2, only the libraries.
>> 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.
> Yes. For the love of God, please don't call "the Zope Framework" 4.0!
Heh, don't call the "*the* Zope framework" at all! There are a bunch of
frameworks lurking in the codebase, and none of them is a "web
framework" in the sense the rest of the Python web development community
users: Grok and BFG do match what they mean, more or less.
Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com
Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -