On 10/6/07, Roger Ineichen <dev@projekt01.ch> wrote:
You are using 7 times the term "Zope2" and 9 times "Zope 3" and also "Plone 3.0" in this small text. Can you try to describe this without "2 or 3" in "Zope *"? I guess not, right?
Now you are being silly. :-) He was writing a text about how small the difference was between Zope2 and Zope3 developer. How would he do that without using those words, so you suggest?
You also use the term "Plone 3.0" which you implie that we know that you mean the Plone which uses Zope 3 components.
No, he explicitly says that Plone 3.0 has a heavy use of Zope 3 components. That is not an "implication".
You are respecting the postifx 3.0 in the Plone world but not for Zope? why?
Nobody in the plone world is taking about Plone 3 developers and Plone 2 developers.
I'm a little confused and don't understand why you are lobbing for such a renaming and at the same time you are using this terms so heavy.
What renaming is he lobbying for? This is not about renaming anything. I think this discussion would be more constructive if you put more of your time into trying to understand what other say instead of trying to misinterpret them. -- Lennart Regebro: Zope and Plone consulting. http://www.colliberty.com/ +33 661 58 14 64