> Roger Ineichen wrote:
> > > What makes you think so? I, for one, have not the slightest
> > > clue of how zope.wfmc works.
> > > Still I'm able to contribute to Zope 3, am I not? If I
> > > refactor something, I might even
> > > have to touch zope.wfmc, but for the most part this could be
> > > very superficial.
> > That's not true. E.g. if you register interfaces with bad
> > docstrings, you will break the zope.app.apidoc package functional
> > tests or other wrong registrations will fail in broken links etc.
> So keeping Zope 3 packages up to speed can also be hard.
> What's your point? That keeping
> Five or Zope 2 packages using Zope 3 code up to speed is a
> different quality of hardness?
> I don't think so.
> > I think it's not that easy and functional tests will become a
> > hard part to maintain in the future if we mix both framework.
> Now, *that* you'll have to explain to me...
If I do a refactoring on existing Zope3 code I proable have to
support backward compatibility on other z3 packages for a clean
commit where all unit test will pass. If we merge the Zope2
code into one trunk, we have to take care on this unit tests as
well. Or we will see broken unit tests in the future.
> > > And if
> > > not, I have some trusty community members who can help me
> on a branch.
> > That's excatly what we don't whant. We are not able to develope
> > and ask others for fixes. This whon't work.
> It has worked in the past. Stephan and I used to do a lot
> together on geddons. Just
> recently Fred and I complemented each other on several things
> related to zpkgutils. Let's
> not pretend we're not teamplayers because we usually are.
So future development will become pure XP programming. On
Zope3 developer and one Zope2 developer for each commit ;-)
> > Btw, what's next.
> > Do we have to merge CMF, Plone and CPS also into the core
> > only because other whon't be able to develop with otherwise.
> You know that's not what I'm proposing. I'm not even going to
> go into this point further.
> My proposal is up for discussion, nothing more, nothing less.
I think you are proposing to mix two totaly different framework
into one big trunk and the benefit will be in getting "Products"
back from Zope2 developers.
We are not in that state right now. We have a lot to do before
we can take car on "Products". I thnink we have to do several
refactorings before we can do such a joint venture.
> > Common, if somebody is not able to install Zope3, Zope2 and Five,
> > I dont' think he will be able to help. I'm really afraid about the
> > idea if a merge will be the part where developer bring to the Zope3
> > core development.
> I'm afraid I don't see the reason for such fear. I see a few
> risks, as I've laid them out
> in the proposals, and I see lots of opportunities.
> > Btw, I can't here reasons like that. Every half year there
> is another
> > reason what we should do for Zope2 developer so that they will
> > contribute more.
> I might be mistaken, but I think this proposal is the first
> serious attempt, ignoring the
> two books out there *wink*.
> > I think you don't speak for all of them and belive that
> > a good skilled developer is able to get ver easy into the
> Zope3 development.
> Tres, Jens, Martijn, Martin, Morton, and Chris -- all people
> with strong Zope 2 background
> -- have given me the opposite impression.
> > Do you really think it's easier for Zope2 developer to get
> into Zope3
> > only because the code lives in the same repsoitory.
> > You draw the picture a little bit to easy.
> > I think if somebody will become a Zope3
> > developer he has to learn the totly new framework first.
> And not only
> > download the code.
> Take Chris McDonough's excellent post. He's *exactly* the
> kinda guy I want to address. He
> has TONS of experience of running actual serious sites with
> Zope 2 and he sees several
> points in Zope 3 that can be improved. Why haven't these
> points been at the tip of his
> fingers yet? Do you think he's unable to learn Zope 3?
No, we really need developer like Chris. But the organization
of a development trunk has nothing to do with that.
> Not everyone had the luxury of being an early Zope 3 adopter...
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev mailing list