Stephan Richter wrote:
Right, thus I am clearly -1. :-) (Wow, now I do not even have to argue myself anymore. ;-)


Note that we spent a lot of time coming up with this name and pretty much all the contributors to the namespace were involved in the discussion.


Zope Corp decided to use "zc",
Lovely Systems "lovely" and a bunch of us not representing a company decided to use "z3c". So what's wrong with that?

I totally support your prerogative to name your packages whatever you want (within reason). My main thought are about long-term aesthetics. A hard to defend cause, I admit.

> (BTW, I would without a thought change the working in
> the ZSCP document to be less asserting and globalizing.)

I wouldn't mind that.

I wonder how Zope Corp. would feel if I would ask them to use zcorp, because "zc" stands for Zope Community?

If "zc" were to become "zope community", I'd be *totally* for it (but I don't speak for ZC here, so that may not be cool with others, like say Jim). We'd either keep using "zc" under the new meaning, or switch to something else.

BTW, I am not aggravated about the mail; I am just very tired of those pointless namespace discussions.

I'm sorry. It's off my chest now, so if this (mercifully) peters out soon, we'll all be better off.
Benji York
Senior Software Engineer
Zope Corporation
Zope3-dev mailing list

Reply via email to