Lennart Regebro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On 2/2/06, Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My sense from the sprint is that developers here use Zope 3 on its technical
> > merits and not its marketing ones.
> Which is why we should market those strengths better.
> On the name change idea, I think it's just gonna make things more confused.
> "What, there is now Zope 2, Zope 3 AND Zope Zingo?"

As I understood the original suggestion, it would be more like

"Zope 3.2 Zalza"

(how many more lame names can we come up with?)

with an appropriate branding (e.g. a logo derived from the Zope logo and a new
website to drum up excitement and get people started quickly). Both the "Zope"
and "3" parts should stay in the picture. There may have been a time for
renaming (or maybe not), but with two books, mailing lists etc. losing the Zope
3 moniker would hurt more than it would help at this point.

The idea is not to undermine what Zope has achieved so far, but to let the
ouside world know that Zope 3 is here, it's new, it's worth checking out, and we
think it's stable and ready. 

A little shouting can go a long way, and like it or not, people will judge Zope
not only on its technical merits, but also on how much effort it put into making
those merits visible and accessible. It took me four weeks to get through
Philipp's book and only then did I realise Z3's potential. And I only started
reading that because I realised knowing it may be good for my involvement with
Plone - all I really cared about was Five. I really doubt many people will be
able to make that kind of investment just to find out if the framework is even
appropriate for them. :)


Zope3-users mailing list

Reply via email to