I am hearing to different stories, sometimes from the same people. On the one hand ZC is this munificent benefactor of Zope. On the other hand ZC is this poor cash strapped little company that can't afford to take any interest in Zope unless they have an immediate incentive. YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS DUDE. I AM SORRY BUT THIS IS JUST NOT POSSIBLE. If ZC is the benefactor of zope, why can't they develop a plan that is independent of day to day money making? If ZC is this little company that does not have the resources to provide true leadership, then why does Zope need them? Clark PS I personally don't think ANY open source project needs a corporate sponsor- much less Zope. But to those who do- and sadly there seem to be many of them on this list- I would say that these obsequious expressions of thanks and gratitude to ZC are uncalled for. I believe Zope would not have trouble finding corporate sponsors even from fortune 500 companies like IBM or HP. But why anyone would want corporate "Mothering" is beyond me though. --- Danny William Adair <danny@adair.net> wrote:
Hi!
Wow, this is the first time I have more zope-dev mails in my inbox than from the "main" list (and I'm very happy that all this stays on one list).
What I have seen from ZC up til now seems like they disclose practically everything but their client base, ok and maybe plans for a commercial Zope product (I count two now that have been dropped, this does not include Zope itself). Efforts have been made to separate the "geeks" from the "tie-fighters" (.org/.com), but I can't see any negative side-effects for the development of Zope itself. Maybe "not yet", but, and this goes out to Mr O'Brien: It needs two to tango. Fair enough. ZC knows that, and especially Paul Everitt has pointed out more than once the dedication that ZC has towards "the community".
I want to thank Zope Corporation for everything that's been done up til now. This is the kind of track I will stay on. I see this working.
Whatever parts of Zope don't work as expected, I don't know in how far I could ever put blame about that on ZC. These guys are more open to new ideas, efforts from the community and mutual benefits than anyone else I have met (in my short life, ok granted). Akm's worries and complaints are legitimate (and he has already corrected his language), and I see people reacting _immediately_. What more can you expect? In my opinion it was just a contretemps that priorities in the User API were set differently than expected from someone who dedicates a hell of a lot of time to that field of development. My personal opinion is that ZC should give akm a CVS account and let him put some elaborate changes to the user api for 2.5, apparently he knows exactly what he's doing.
"Dude": Do it better and _then_ complain. ZC's not yo mama, feeding you software with a spoon. It looks like you're spilling it all, anyway.
Take a look at the ZPL, take a look at the Public CVS, the Wikis, the fishbowls, the open-sourced literature, and then think again. "Closure of code / internals" is not an arguable point when it comes to Zope, that's just being paranoid.
You are welcome to take from the community, you are welcome to contribute to the community, you are welcome to make money with Zope. It's all there. Closure of code is not what will separate the wheat from the chaff, business-wise.
Couldn't-resisting-ly yours, Danny
_______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists -
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com