> Stefane Fermigier wrote:
> >Wade Leftwich wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Guido van Rossum is looking for a web app framework.
> >>
> >>http://blog.delaguardia.com.mx/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=34&blogId=1
> >>
> >>Zope is conspicuous by its absence from the discussion. Hardly a
> >>mention, and no advocacy at all.  Is Zope just too heavyweight for the
> >>project he has in mind? Or what?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I don't think the point is trying to convince guido to use Zope for his
> >pet project, the point is global advocacy:
> >
> >- Guido's word is considered gospel by many people (in that occurrence,
> >I must confess that I have been profoundly disappointed by his attitude
> >- his utter and a priori rejection of XML for a template language, that
> >will be used 95% for the time to produce (X)HTML and the 5% remaining
> >other variant of XML, with all that it implies in terms of validation,
> >etc. is plainly stupid).
> >
> >- Like you noticed, Zope quasi-absence from the discussion is suspicious.
> >
> >Lennart did a reply on his blog
> >(http://blogs.nuxeo.com/sections/blogs/lennart_regebro/2006_02_01_guido-webframeworks).
> >
> >Anyway, I'm saddened by both the quasi-absence of the Zope community in
> >this debate, and also the badmouthing of Zope (even sometimes, the
> >hatred) by some Python developpers taking part in the discussion.
> >
> >There are, however, some constructive remarks like Ian Bicking's:
> >http://blogs.nuxeo.com/sections/blogs/lennart_regebro/2006_02_01_guido-webframeworks?post_id=if-mohammed-won-t-come
> >
> >  S.
> >
> >
> >
> I think this has to do with python being used both as a scripting
> language and as a language to create high-level components. There will
> always be a category of users looking for quick-and-dirty templating
> capabilities in web frameworks and others looking for more abstract
> components that address issues from a more abstract and certainly more
> complex perspective.
> In zope itself level the same opposition can be found between
> "file-system" vs "TTW python-script"-based development.
> I wonder how those who criticize zope3 for being too big a framework and
> too complex to understand, would figure out how to use Java-based web
> application frameworks...
> /JM

I've followed the Guido blogs/discussion loosely.  As a relative
newcomer, this is my first real experience with the Python community's
confusion of Zope2 and Zope3.  I've seen on the list that people have
been discussing renaming and other remedies to this problem.

In my opinion, I think a little branding could go a long way.  Instead
of renaming the entire project, call it  "Zope3 Zebra" or "Zope3
Panther" (clearly these are horrible, but you can see where I am going
with this).

Then create a dedicated website www.zope3zebra.org that basically
links the Zope 3 book, tutorials, example code, and existing projects
like SchoolTool on the front page.  Clearly brand it as a
"industrial-strength, pythonic web framework" and a complete rewrite
from Zope2.  Provide a link to all Python web frameworks and explain
the advantages of industrial-strength, non-hackish code for people who
want to do it right the first time.  This front page will provide a
jumping off point for zope3 devs and users.

Does this make sense?  It's only a small rebrand (and the Zope3 stays
intact) and an assembly of components that already exist.  Basically,
you can use this occasion as a coming out party... "Zope3 is here, and
we're for real".

Bottom line, I think the proof is in the pudding, and Zope3 quality is
superb so it's not going anywhere.  But a little better
organization/marketing to the outside world could go a long way.

Anyways, a thought.
Zope3-users mailing list

Reply via email to