On Wednesday 01 March 2006 10:06, Jim Fulton wrote:
> > I don't see how *saying* what Zope 5 will contain will make it *exist*
> > any time sooner.
> You seem to be arguing against a roadmap, which is puzzling.
I don't think Martijn is arguing against a roadmap, he just asserts (and
( agree with him) that the current roadmap using Five is a good one that we
should be following for while.
BTW, you also have not addressed the naming issue. I think that throwing
another name out there will make the community more wary than comfortable.
My suggestion would be to move along as we do now, replace the security
mechanism, use Zope 3's PTs in Zope 2, even switch the publisher, etc. Then
we can revisit our vision.roadmap and see how we can go from there.
If you find this unacceptable, then you or someone else must do a much better
job explaining the technical details of this vision.
CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training
Zope3-dev mailing list