On Wednesday 23 November 2005 10:16, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Sounds crazy, I know. But I'm serious. Looking for your comments at:
I am -1. If I could I would veto this proposal. Here is why:
To be totally honest, I really, really don't care about Zope 2!
I am a Zope 3 developer. If Zope 2 code is in the Zope 3 code base, I have to
relearn it again and additionally learn Five. Why? Just so I can keep
developing Zope 3. This may raise the contribution bar too high for me and I
would consider stopping to contribute. If the bar is too high for me, what do
you expect from other people?
Next, there are several third party applications that do not care about Zope 2
either, but that use the trunk to do their development with. One example is
SchoolTool. Having to checkout both, Zope 3 and 2 would just be ridiculous,
to say the least! (Note that several contributions of mine during the last
weeks were due to my work on SchoolTool using a writeable Zope 3 trunk
The proposal only benefits Zope 2 people, really. Sure, some of the stuff in
Zope 2 that should be forward-ported, but that's minimal.
CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training
Zope3-dev mailing list