Stephan Richter wrote:
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.

You have a point here.

Zope 3 is an application server.
Zope 2 is an application/application server.
Grok is a self-proclaimed web framework.

They all share common components which I'd like to call "the Zope Libraries" (zope.*).

Zope is a diverse community, but there's unity in the libraries. This is what Zope 3 is mostly about. The Zope 3 app server is this one special configuration where and is used. There are, in fact, many other possible uses of those libraries without having to call it "Zope 3".

zope3-dev is really about discussing those libraries. Sometimes we also talk about the app server, but that happens rarely if you think about it.

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.

I don't think there's been a canonical decision. But I think it's one of the challenges that the ZF board is supposed to address. This is, after all, what the community governance is for.

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 applications.

Nobody's trying to do that. We didn't "explode" Zope 3 because Zope 2 could cope better with it that way. It happened out of other reasons. You know that.

You can't ignore the fact that the Zope Libraries are used elsewhere. That doesn't mean I'm not encouraging people to use Zope3-the-app server. We should just think about what Zope3-the-app server really is. It's just a special configuration of those libraries. And it's just one possible one (Grok is another possible one, for example). I think we should give both of those as well as Zope 2 an adequate place in Zope's story. Ignoring that all three exist and thinking they are separate from each other is wishful thinking.

-- -- Professional Zope documentation and training
Zope3-dev mailing list

Reply via email to