On 10/6/07, Roger Ineichen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?
Now you are being silly. :-) He was writing a text about how small the difference was between Zope2 and Zope3 developer. How would he do that without using those words, so you suggest? > You also use the term "Plone 3.0" which you implie that we > know that you mean the Plone which uses Zope 3 components. No, he explicitly says that Plone 3.0 has a heavy use of Zope 3 components. That is not an "implication". > You are respecting the postifx 3.0 in the Plone world but > not for Zope? why? Nobody in the plone world is taking about Plone 3 developers and Plone 2 developers. > 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. What renaming is he lobbying for? This is not about renaming anything. I think this discussion would be more constructive if you put more of your time into trying to understand what other say instead of trying to misinterpret them. -- Lennart Regebro: Zope and Plone consulting. http://www.colliberty.com/ +33 661 58 14 64 _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3email@example.com Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com