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
[email protected]
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
