> >> Alternatively, we could use our energy to actually work together on a
> >> new website instead of competing. There's a zope-web mailing list,
> >> after all, so go and talk there. This would have my preference.
> > If you want to fix the Zope 2 website at the same time as branding Zope
> > 3, I fear it is a monumental task that will never happen.
> Yes, that is indeed a risk that I'm well aware of. Still, I think we can
> present a good 'brochure' about Zope 2 on a unified website. Whatever we
> do, we should definitely sketch out the relationship between the two
> projects, something that is now completely missing. Zope 2 needs
> marketing as much as Zope 3.
I feel as though zope2 has marketing and a website -- it's zope.org.
While zope.org could be improved, I hold that the central issue is
zope3 lacking a coherent identity outside of zope2. I would envision:
* zope.org giving a moderate foothold to zope3 on the front page, but
devoting the content to zope2.
* zope3.org being all zope3 all the time. Clearly, we need to
introduce zope3 in the context of zope2, but zope3 needs to take the
front seat. Again, zope3 needs a unique identity.
I liked the way the distinction that Lennart presented earlier on the
list: "Zope 2 was for creating web sites, and it was too damn good so
it got used as an application server too. Zope 3 is a dedicated
application server built with the experience of Zope2." I'm
paraphrasing, but I thought the idea is nectar: Zope2 was so
successful that it became a victim of its own success in a few
regards. I think this idea would be the optimal tack on presenting
Zope3 as completely independent yet in the context of a successful
> > The Zope 2 website is so big, and has so much content that it should
> > have somebody working on it full time if it needs changing.
> > Perhaps this "monumental" approach to a zope site is wrong. Microsites
> > with well defined boundaries, that a few or a single person could be
> > responsible for might be a better approach.
> Yes. Rest assured my ambition is to keep ambitions as low as possible.
> :) Otherwise nothing will happen.
I think Martijn's right on here with keeping ambitions low, and I
think he's done a great job on zope3-web.
As for competition v. a monolithic community effort -- we want to be
in the middle here.
I submit that the best way would be to divide and conquer through
competition. In true Zope3 spirit, let one of our hotshots /
benevolent dictators define a common format and put forth the
components that we will want -- ie, the front page blurb, distinctions
of Zope 2 and 3, getting started, the documentation, and so forth and
so on. With these components, allow submissions for each.
As Martijn alluded, I doubt that more than a handful of people have
the free time / desire to design an entire brochure website. But
together we could each put our best foot forward on a specific
section. Then, as a community, we could select how to best use (and
further mix) the components that we think our best.
In any event, I can see zope3.org, and it looks glooorious. I say we
get this baby live by the August release of Samuel L. Jackson's
upcoming movie "Snakes on a Plane".
Zope3-users mailing list