On Saturday 06 October 2007 13:14, Andreas Jung wrote:
> > 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?
> s/Zope 2/Zope application server
> s/Zope 3/Zope components
I personally feel quiet offended to see Zope 3 degraded to a set of
components. Zope 3 in itself is also an application server; Zope 2, on the
other hand, is an application.
> > 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.
> As said: there was a big discussion on the terms "Zope 2" and
> "Zope 3" during the last DZUG conference. Bringing it to the point:
> the terms "zope 2" and "zope 3" should die. There's only 'Zope'.
I have not been involved in this discussion. Having discussions like this
during a conference is good as a starting point, but should never be seen as
a canonical decision.
> Although you are a Zope component-only developer
> you can not ignore the dependent applications and framework.
So you are saying I have to change Zope 3's story to cope with Zope 2's
identity crisis? Honestly, degrading Zope 3 to a set of libraries and
components is marketing poisoning for people deploying pure Zope 3
CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training
Zope3-dev mailing list