Benji York wrote:
> Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
>> b) It is exactly the opposite of what we've been trying to do for the
>> last couple of months: convergence, not divergence!
> I think that differentiating Zope 3 from Zope 2 is a good thing.
Sure. I never said that their differences shouldn't be stated. However,
I see them as two corner stones in the Zope evolvement path. A third one
would be the CMF whose separate site, by the way, vanished into nirvana
some time ago...
If you want to point out Zope 2's and Zope 3's differences, we can't
have information floating around on separate sites. The top #1 questions
on #zope that have to do with Zope 3 are:
1. Is Zope 3 mature enough to be developed for/with?
2. When should I use Zope 3?
3. What's the deal with Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the future?
These questions are all about the differences and advantages of the two
platforms, but they all have to do with the whole Zope brand. Why split
all this apart?
>> If we want Zope 3 and its Component Architecture to be recognized by
>> people, it needs to be a first class citizen on zope.org, not some
>> separate site.
> Nothing says that zope3.org can't be prominently displayed on zope.org.
This makes it almost sound like a link under "Zope exits" :). Seriously,
I'm saying that Zope 3 promotion should be accessbile right on the front
page. If you mean that by "prominently displayed", then I don't see why
we need a separate site for that if zope.org could take that over. I
don't think no one wants to prominently display Zope 2 anymore...
>> Why? Because Zope 2 will soon incorporate lots of Zope 3 technology
>> (it already does incorporate some),
> I would posit that there are *many* non-Zope 2 users, and that is a
> group we need to attract. Too closely associating Zope 2 and Zope 3
> will only inhibit that.
This is a good point. Zope 2 indeed had to experience some heavy
ressentiments from the Python community. However, I don't see why Zope 3
couldn't "rehabilitate" Zope 2 here. Showing that we're actually
willling to evolve that old beast called Zope 2 to the slick new
architecture called Zope 3 is a pretty good message.
>> making it all look like two separate worlds is far from reality.
> I'm more interested in promoting Zope 3 than having web site structure
> reflect reality.
I have to take back the word "reality" and insert "our goals": Making it
look like two separate worlds is far from _our goals_. I too want to
promote Zope 3, as well as Zope 3 technology inside Zope 2. I just
believe that this is best done while staying under the hood of the Zope
Zope3-dev mailing list