Quoting Tim Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> While you may / may not have a legitimate stand on
the name
> change. This is the wrong 'string to pull'.
> This is in fact consistent with the open source
nature of the
> product. There comes a time when a decision needs to
be made. It
> gets made by the benevolent dictator, at the time
> decides. It's part of the process. (Yes, I used the
> properly too!). <g>

I know (even before I read Michel's and Tim's
messages), that I've mistakenly used the term open
source in my argument.  Perhaps I was thinking of the
fishbowl process DC has put into place to allow a more
open development process and public participation in
decisions in general.  Sorry for the misuse in this
case. I certainly prefer an excellent open source
product with bad naming conventions over a closed
source product with good ones.

I suppose I am most interested in consistent,
representative naming.  With Michel's explanation of
the Python "Method" and generic script, I'm more
comfortable with the name.  I am, however, interested
in what will be done to make ther other "Methods" less
intimidating to new users as Michel argued was one
reason for using Script.  Will we end up with DTML
Documents and DTML Scripts, SQL Scripts, etc.?

Thank you, DC and Zope community, for a great product.
I would use it even if they were called "little bits of
Python code." :-)


Zope maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )

Reply via email to