On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 17:27:43 -0000, Shane Hathaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Friday 03 February 2006 12:14, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Andreas Zeidler wrote:
On Fri, Feb 03 17:24, Encolpe Degoute <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Okay, I am giving in on this. There is a three step process that will
have to be fullfilled to assign a codename to the Zope 3.3 release.
Zope 3 / Revolution ?
well, how about "Zope3, Reloaded" for all the matrix fans out there?
The idea of release code names adds a little spice. Most people like
spices on their food, so why not on their software too? But the naming
scheme really has to be based on the Tarzan series. Jim's a Tarzan
I'd say assigning a name is a responsibility of the release manager.
It's not something to spend time debating. Are you the release manager
for 3.3? If so, and you don't want to assign a name, then by all means
forget the idea.
Guys ... from my reading of the z3-user discussion, there were two subtly
different things that came out:
- Have funky release codenames. Okay, good - makes it easier to talk
about Zope 3.2 vs. 3.3. However, I think this is secondary (by far) to ...
- Have a *brand*. That means one name, a name that doesn't change. It
could just be "Zope 3" with a capital 3, or it could be a more distinctive
name, e.g. Zope 3 Zomething (where Zomething is something to be decided)
to have an even more distinctive brand; a logo that has some punch, a
colour scheme, a web site with proper advocacy and some start-here
documentation and some quick tutorials.
The secondary brand name (the Zomething in my example above) was the
original example - and I personally think this is a good idea, just to
give the clear message that this is distinct but building on Zope 2.
Seriously, look at http://www.djangoproject.com or http://rubyonrails.com.
This is about getting people to *understand* what Zope is about, to
understand that we *care* that they understand and that we made an
*effort* to make it easy for them to get into it. It's about lowering the
barrier to entry and the risk that they'll spend time learning something
that'll turn out to be a dead end. It's about showing off that Zope can be
sexy and knock the socks off the competition. It's about generating some
excitement, not just a dreary list of technical blather.
This is the proposal that considers the most serious consideration in my
opinion. The original discussion showed that a lot of people found Zope's
lack of branding a problem. Now it's time to find a solution to that
(or so I hope) :-)
Zope3-dev mailing list