Hash: SHA1

Martijn Faassen wrote:

> We have three perspectives:
> * the ZTK is new, therefore the ZTK doesn't need to care about Zope 3 at 
> all.


> * the ZTK is a renamed, refocused Zope 3, therefore the ZTK needs to 
> care about Zope 3.

- -1

> * both: the ZTK is a way for us to stop caring about Zope 3, given some 
> work.

- -1

> I think a zopeapp KGS that will help them transition existing code from 
> Zope 2.12 to Zope 2.13 in working condition would be helpful to Zope 2 
> users.

I do not believe there is any meaningful group of people who would be
catastrophically affected by not having this transition become part of
the ZTK's responsibilities.

>> You keep asserting a "backward compatibility problem," but haven't
>> defended it with any evidence.  Be specific:  who is hurt by the removal
>> of packages from the ZTK?
> Everybody who uses any previous KGS, once they upgrade their codebases 
> to use the ZTK. Unless they can pull in the extended list of zope.app 
> packages, so that they can upgrade their app without having to assemble 
> a working list of ZTK compatible versions themselves. (and then they can 
> go and remove the zope.app dependencies)

Again, I doubt there is any meaningful number of people falling into
this group.


P.S.: I'm watching on the sidelines because I consider myself much more
of a simple Zope 2 user than someone who has valid input for the ZTK per
se. I just don't grok (pun intended) any of these assertions that the
ZTK has any responsibility for providing a stepping stone for
zope.app.*-package users.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)

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

Reply via email to