Hi Andreas > What do you man by "two development paradigms"? > > Please don't build a wall between Zope 2 and Zope 3 > developers. Most "old-school" Zope 2 developers are doing > development also with Zope 3 components and Zope 3 > techniques. Look at Plone 3.0 and its heavy usage of Zope 3 > techniques...impressing. The Zope 3 development paradigms are > highly accepted by most Zope 2 core developers...we are all > sitting in the same boat. There is a fundamental difference > in the Zope 2 and Zope 3 architecture but little difference > between the paradigms how we should design and write software > on top of the Zope platform in the future. > > The distinction between Zope 2 and Zope 3 must disappear. We > must speak of "Zope". Everything else is counterproductive > when it comes to promoting Zope. There is only one Zope > developer community and most of us have a Zope > 2 and a Zope 3 hat on (others have a CMF or a Plone head). An > artificial separation between Zope 2 and Zope 3 developers is > undesirable in my opinion. You are using 7 times the term "Zope2" and 9 times "Zope 3" and also "Plone 3.0" in this small text. Can you try to describe this without "2 or 3" in "Zope *"? I guess not, right?
I really don't care about how it is called, but I'm sure we need some naming convention and since we have one, I don't see any reason to change this. You also use the term "Plone 3.0" which you implie that we know that you mean the Plone which uses Zope 3 components. You are respecting the postifx 3.0 in the Plone world but not for Zope? why? I'm a little confused and don't understand why you are lobbing for such a renaming and at the same time you are using this terms so heavy. Regards Roger Ineichen > Andreas _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3email@example.com Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com