Hash: SHA1

Roger Ineichen schrieb am 24.11.2005 11:29:

> Hi Philipp


> And please stop telling that there will be a migration path
> for somthing. I guess there will never be such a path. Perhaps
> custom products can be rewriten based on Zope3 libraries, but a real
> migration path like known from other software will never be supported.


But in the beginning of Zope3 there were strong commitments:

- ----------------------------------------------------------------
From: jim at zope.com (Jim Fulton)
Date: Fri Feb 14 07:34:25 2003
Subject: [Zope2-migration] Zope3 name
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Paul Everitt wrote:


> Things like, will my site still work,

For Zope 3.0, the answer is "yes, you may have to apply some conversion

> should I deploy a new application
> today or wait,

You should deploy new applications today.

 > can we use the expertise we've acquired,


 > will Plone
> work.


 >  The first two were the big ones with decision makers.


> I'm puzzled that you're puzzled. :^)  The nature of the transition has
> been in a "we'll figure that out later" status.  Well, clearly I can't
> field too many questions with that stance.

The technical details of the transition have been defered. The bottom
line has always been that we will provide tools to allow people to leverage
their investment in Zope 2.

> My challenge is getting into the first level of detail beyond the broad
> strokes outlined in the two documents you mentioned.

I don't think you need to. You certainly don't need to do answer the

 > Examples:
> 1) Will Zope 3 support the Zope 2 API, or even a subset?

This has not been decided, but the likelihood is that it will.

> 2) Will Zope 2 support the Zope 3 API, or even a subset?  (This is
> discussed below.)

This has not been decided, but the likelihood is that it will.

> 3) If the community isn't interested in working on migration, will ZC
> devote the resources to complete the job?

The community and ZC are interested in working on migration.  If
the community is completely uninterested in migration, ZC will,
at least, develop the tools it needs to support maigration and
share them with the community.

> 4) During 2003, developers will have three APIs to choose from (Zope 2,
> CMF, Zope 3).  Will they know when to choose one versus the other?

They have already been given some good guidelines.  I think that the
could contribute by helping to package this information and make it readily

> 5) Will ZC participate in the ongoing development of Zope 2 and CMF,
> keeping it "active" with (reasonably compelling) features until the time
> Zope 3 is capable of doing all that Zope 2 + CMF can do?



Maybe you are refering to an idea you suggested of doing away with Zope 3
and, instead, gradually adding Zope 3 ideas to Zope 2. I'm totally
against *that* idea. I am in favor of backporting Zope 3 technologies to
Zope 2 to *facilitate the transition to Zope 3*.

> My apologies, I certainly got this wrong.  If meaningful parts of Zope 3
> are introduced back into Zope 2, then we're in good shape.

It is likely that this will be the approach used.

The goal is to make transition as smooth as possible. I want to
put off deciding for sure on the technical approach until after
the beta.

BTW, I wonder if a EuroPython sprint might be a good venue to kick this


- --
Jim Fulton           mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]       Python Powered!
CTO                  (888) 344-4332            http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation     http://www.zope.com       http://www.zope.org

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
- From jim at zope.com  Fri Feb 14 08:07:39 2003
From: jim at zope.com (Jim Fulton)
Date: Fri Feb 14 08:09:52 2003
Subject: [Zope2-migration] Re: What I think we should focus on now
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

R. David Murray wrote:


> Migration tools and back porting are not yet on anybody's radar
> screen...no, they are definately on the radar screen, they are just
> off there in the distance.  The itches that need scratched right
> now are completing out what is needed to get real applications (that
> certain core developers are actually working on, ex: SteveA) running
> inside Zope3.  Once we have a Zope3 product or two for which someone
> then says, "gee, I want to run this on my existing wiz-bang Zope2
> site", *then* backward compatability will get worked on by core
> developers, IMO.  Nearer term, a Zope2 developer can decide they
> want to write some new product they need in a forward compatabile
> way.  If they then approach the Z3 developers with specific questions
> and problems, again the compatability pieces will get worked on.
> A real, *concrete* problem is what is needed to get this process
> kick started, not a discussion of what tools we *think* we might want.

Your note focusses on motivational issues.  I guess that a lot of people
think that the lack of detail on transition is due to a lack of motivation.

For me, the Zope Pope and the head of the Zope 3 development effort,
this is not the case. I am extremely motivated and committed
to provide a smooth transition. The reason that we are not working on the
technical details now is that the time is not right yet.

It would be foolish to work on the technical aspects of migration until
the think we are migrating to is really well defined.  We are getting close,
but it's really too soon.  It will make sense to focus on migration after
the first beta, when the new platform will be a bit more hardened than it is

- -----------------------------------------------------------------------


- --
Egon Frerich, Freudenbergstr. 16, 28213 Bremen

Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: GnuPT 2.7.2
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

Zope3-dev mailing list
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to