Martin Aspeli wrote:
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Merging it into Zope trunk will get it into the Zope 2.12 release which is at this point not scheduled yet, but is unlikely to get a release before early 2009. This should give us plenty of time to test. This sounds good. Here's another idea, though: In accordance with "release early and often", how about scheduling the 2.12 release shortly after the 2.11 one? So the only "new" thing in 2.12 would be the philikon-aq branch (it would still ship with the same Zope 3 libraries as 2.11, etc.).
I suspect we want to do something about the eggification story of Zope 2 for Zope 2.12 as well. Figuring out the approach and documenting it might take some additional time. I don't see that releasing another Zope 2.13 shortly after 2.12 makes a lot of sense.
Why don't we get started on that, too, then?
I think eggification of Zope 2 is relatively easy, and most of the necessary R&D has already been done. In fact, a lot of the eggs exist already.
I wonder if Philipp would be amenable to writing a proposal on this, and get Chris McDonough's input.
IMO, a Zope2 egg release should depend on the following packages: - 'ZODB3' (already packaged) - 'transaction' (depended on by newer ZODBs) - 'ZConfig' (also depended on by newer ZODBs) - 'StructuredText' (should be broken out into its own egg) - 'docutils' (should use existing egg) - 'mechanize' (should use existing egg) - 'pytz' (should use existing egg) - all zope.* packages (properly pinned) that zope2 depends on The actual top-level egg that depends on these things would contain all the other packages depended on by Zope 2 (e.g. DateTime, Missing, Products/*, Acquisition, ExtensionClass, ZPublisher, ZServer, etc). We might call it 'zope2libs'. What needs to get worked out is the ability to share headers between ZODB and this package so things can compile properly. - C