Lennart Regebro wrote:
> I agree with everything except:
> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 23:30, Martijn Faassen <faas...@startifact.com> wrote:
>> Goal 2: We want users to use the ZTK instead of the Zope 3.4 KGS.
> I don't agree with this statement. What we want is that the Zope 3 KGS
> becomes based on the ZTK KGS. After that happens, people might realize
> they can move from Zope 3 KGS to ZTK KGS, but that's up to them. "We"
> don't want anything there. :) It depends on what they do with Zope 3.

Yes, a Zope 3 KGS will have to be a superset of the ZTK KGS. If we want 
to retain that name at all.

But there will also have to be a transitional KGS for Zope 3, that 
contains things that we have deprecated and can be replaced (unless the 
ZMI is in use) with ZTK counterparts, such as zope.app.container. This 
one is needed so that people can update their imports.

>> Fact 6: We were maintaining such a KGS within the ZTK.
> I dont' think you are. The ZTK KGS as it is today is not a replacement
> for the Zope 3 KGS, and never was, and never was intended as such.

Effectively we were maintaining a large part of such a KGS within the 
ZTK. Perhaps not everything, but much that was the old Zope 3 was in 
there. This was the only version list which we as a community were 
maintaining of those packages.

I agree that the ZTK never was intended to fully replace Zope 3 so 
things had to change.



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