Stephan Richter wrote:
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.

What do you think the current roadmap is?  I'm not sure we agree onwhat it is.
That's a huge problem.

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.

I think that having one name for two radically different, though related,
things is very confusing. There are really
2 main technologies that people care about:

1. The Zope app server. This is characterized by things like an object
   file system, through-the-web scripting and/or development, pluggable
   course-grained add-ons, etc.

2. The collection of Zope technologies that can be combined and reused in a
   variety of ways.  These technologies support the app server, but they have
   a life of their own.

I think that these efforts are very different and that calling them both
"zope" is very confusing to people.  OTOH, there are related. The first builds
on the second, which is why, in many ways, "Z" is a good name for the second.
I'll reiterate that the serach term "Z" is handled well by Google.

IANANE (I am not a naming expert).  I'm willing to defer to someone
else on the names, but I think we do need to distinguish these two efforts
more than we do now.

I'll note that the fact that the single name "Zope 3" refers to both 
above is very confusing to people.

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.

Do we also fix WebDAV in Zope 3?  How about TTW scripting?  How about
process control?  Or all of the other things in Zope 2 that we haven't
gotten around to yet?  If we aren't going to work on these, don't
you think we are giving people false expectations for Zope 3's application

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.

Perhaps, although technical details don't belong in a vision.

Can you explain the current vision?  Can you explain the current roadmap?
Do you think we all agree on what it is?


Jim Fulton           mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]       Python Powered!
CTO                  (540) 361-1714  
Zope Corporation
Zope3-dev mailing list

Reply via email to