-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Stephan Richter wrote:
>> Plone is using z3c.form. We are currently in the process of releasing
>> 2.0, which has a massive amount of new features, which are very useful. As a
>> z3c.form developer I want to stay compatible with the current Plone release,
>> because (a) the code gets tested in a very different environment, and (b) it
>> probably represents my largest user base. By dropping Python 2.4 support for
>> the Toolkit, I now have stay compatible with 2 or 3 versions of the KGS
>> 3.3?, Zope 3.4, Zope Toolkit 1.0) and 2 or 3 Python versions (2.4, 2.5,
>> 2.6?). This is a major burden. The problem is that I have this burden for
>> every package that I care about to be usable in Plone.
> As a side note, we just started the community discussion about moving at
> least to Zope 2.11 / 3.4 for Plone in a release by the end of this year.
> This should take away some of the burden with Zope 3.3, but will not
> change the Python 2.4 situation.
Why don't you plan to leapfrog 2.11 and go straight to 2.12 (which I
thought you were planning to do anyway)? That gets you onto a
"supported" version of Python (2.4 is in lockdown), and makes the ZTK
relevant to you.
Plone's policies are in conflict, here:
- - Ultra-stable about the Zope version: you claim you can't update the
version of Zope used in a 3.x release from the version used in 3.0.
- - Completely unsupported use of "cherry-picked" updates to the packages
which shipped with that Zope.
If you can reasonably do the QA to ensure that the second policy doesn't
break Plone, the you can equally well update the Zope / Python versions.
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 -