Martijn Faassen wrote: >>> 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. >> >> And kudos to Andrew Kuchling for writing those! I don't think >> anyone in the Zope 3 community has the time do write something like >> that. > > It doesn't have to be as involved as it is for Python, but if we > introduce changes that depreciate a significant amount of old usages of > Zope 3, I think we *should* write a developer changes document. It > should contain some explanation of what a developer is supposed to do > instead, and perhaps a bit on why we're doing this stuff.
The motivation and old vs. new way of doing things is covered in my proposal. In fact, most proposals cover this. I fail to see how proposals don't fit your above stated requirements here. >> Perhaps proposals aren't ideal for communicating development-level >> changes, but then again, that's what they are describing, right? >> Proposed development changes... > > They are not describing what has indeed changed, Maybe so. I'm saying that if they aren't, they need to be changed. Proposals should reflect the actual change; then they're useful. I made that point in my last email. > and the target audience is quite different. That doesn't mean it can't be broadened. Frankly, I think that the current target audience and the ones I want to include in the future are close enough and expect so much of the same information that one documentn would be enough for both. >> As said, I'm not saying that proposals the way we have them now are >> sufficient. But, with just a little more formalization to the >> whole process, I think they could serve for what you want. > > They would be helpful but they won't do what I want, just like Python's > PEPs don't do what the typical Python developer wants when they try to > understand what changed in a Python version and why they're getting > deprecation warnings. They're helpful of course in case you need to know > the little details, but PEPs are written by and for Python core > developers, and not for Python programmers. I'm not a Python core developer but I still like reading PEPs (though I also enjoyed AMK's What's New in Python series). Hmm, I guess I shouldn't bring myself in as an example here, though. I just very much like the fact that when somebody asks for the big changes in Zope 3.X, you can just say: proposal no. x, y, z and that's it. Python can do this and so can Plone. This provides an immense amount of transparenty. > So, while your proposals to improve the proposal process are useful: > > * it won't help with the ZCML deprecation changes (as you still used the > old procedure) Well, duh :), I would obviously convert it to the "new" procedure, whatever that was. Otherwise my proposing the "new" procedure seems pretty pointless. > * I don't really think your proposals target the problem I'm pointing > out. That's fine, there are other problems to solve, after all, and > while it's not targetting the same problem it at least improves what I'm > pointing out somewhat too. But please stop telling me they do what I > want. :) Well, I *thought* they did what I want. I never tried to put words in your mouth. Let me get a final statement out that perhaps is still misunderstood or not understood at all: The way proposals work right now is not sufficient for what I *think* you're trying to achieve. That's where we agree. However, I propose to require them to be sufficient. It would not only improve the documentation of changes (which is what I *think* your goal is), it would also actually account for our formal development process that we oh-so praise. Because, as you say rightfully, sometimes proposals aren't even implemented as they were written in the first place, or at least they weren't updated after they've been implemented in a slightly different way. I make no exception to myself here, I personally did this a few times (I remember at least one time with the Message IDs as Rocks proposal). That wasn't good. Philipp _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3email@example.com Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com