I think the most sane would be:
Zope 2.8 -> Zope 2.9 -> Zope 2.x, for however many iterations it's necessary. Zope 2 will grow some Zope 3 forward compatibility with Five, but this depends on Five contributors. Right now, we're doing fairly well and we hope this keeps up.
Zope X3.0 -> Zope 3.1 -> Zope 3.2 and so on, until we feel we want to declare a Zope 4.0. If you want to drop the X after 3.1 that's fine too, but I don't see a reason not to drop it now. The whole "X3-3.0" is rather bizarre and confuses -- X3 is not a release name but a product name, but we have no real plans for a non-X 3 anyway..., but the mythical Zope 3 "proper" *is* the reason for having the 3 duplicated, as far as I can see.
You need to communicate that the strategy changed, and that we won't have a Zope 3 ever that will offer Zope 2 backwards compatibility. We may want to supply some of that, but that should be a separate project, with its own release numbers. I'll call that project Six for now, as that's 2 times 3. :)
It's probably better to correct this impression now than to wait indefinitely as:
* people can prepare their migration strategy better, either by porting to Zope 3 straight or porting to Five first, and then later to Zope 3. Nobody will be waiting for magical components which will be offered by Six then, as that's complete vaporware now; there are no resources for it, nobody seems to really want to do it, etc.
* we can drop the X and have a more sensible release naming pattern for Zope 3.
* we have at least another strategy now and can point people to Five/Zope 2.8.
Martijn _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3firstname.lastname@example.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com