On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Fabio Tranchitella <kobold@kobold.it> wrote:
* 2010-03-03 20:41, Chris McDonough wrote:
Why wouldn't that be worked out here? Is it because you just want the mechanics of such a project done elsewhere without having to see it talked about on this maillist? Or is it because you disagree that it should be done? Or... what?
The main issue is related to the different use cases we have for the ZTK: some people use (or want to use) the ZTK as a monolithic set of packages that can be considered "somehow" the upgrade path from zope3 with the exclusion of zope.app.* (if possible).
Others (like me and you, Chris) see the ZTK as a set of core packages (mainly the bicycle repair kit, which is not the only self-contained subset of useful packages though) plus a huge load of dependencies we are bringing forward from the "old" zope3 releases.
Others, like me and Martijn and probably many many others, see the ZTK as a set of packages that can be used in various subsets and combination. We want as few dependencies as possible. We also want a configuration of versions that are known to work together because they are tested together. We want stability and we want processes that will help us move forward. I don't think the people who want to advance Blue Bream are really all that different.
Our points of view are totally different,
I don't think so. Where we seem to differ is on the specific point of change management, and especially testing.
and I suppose the first group of people fear that fragmentation can influence the quality and stability of the ZTK as a whole.
The ZTK was created in part to deal with instability issues arising from people working on parts without testing the whole.
In my opinion, we can only gain defining explicitly the bicycle repair kit if somebody is willing to maintain it (and I refer to documentation and marketing stuff, not code because it is already very stable). If this cannot be done with consensus on zope-dev, but a group of people is really interested in it, I don't think it can be or should be stopped and, TBH, I don't see how it can influence the ZTK.
I don't think anyone is objecting to marketing efforts. Even these core components will need maintenance and updates from time to time. *An* important question is how these changes will be ma naged in the context of the larger community. Jim -- Jim Fulton