Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:

Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:

Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:


If no one objects to the branch as it is, I will merge it on the weekend.


Done now.

Did you manage to make a start on a developer changes document for Zope 3.2?


Not yet. I've thought about this some more. I think that you're right about the
developer visibility of changes. I also think that doubling information in the
wiki and in the source (where it will likely rot if it's not a doctest) isn't
ideal.

Using proposals for communicating development-level changes is not ideal. This is why Python has a separate "what changed in Python 2.x" document series, which is actually readily comprehensible, as opposed to many of the PEPs.

So, suggestions to improve the proposal process for Zope 3 sound fine, but they don't target the issue I've been trying to point out. I do not see this as doubling the information - there is frequently a large difference between a proposal for a Zope 3 core developer audience and a description for a Zope 3 developer after it has been done. In addition, there is frequently a difference between what's been proposed and what exactly has been done.

Regards,

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

Reply via email to